MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2514589104 · doi:10.1109/scc.2016.14

Cost-Effective Request Scheduling for Greening Cloud Data Centers

2016· article· en· W2514589104 on OpenAlexaff
Ying Chen, Chuang Lin, Jiwei Huang, Xuemin Shen

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicCloud Computing and Resource Management
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceCloud computingScheduling (production processes)Service providerData centerProfit (economics)Distributed computingDatabaseService (business)Computer networkOperating systemMathematical optimizationBusiness

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

With the popularity of cloud computing, many cloud service providers deploy regional data centers to offer services and pplications. These large-scale data centers have drawn extensive attention in terms of the huge energy demand and carbon emission. Thus, how to make use of their spatial diversities to green data centers and reduce cloud provider's costs is an important concern. In this paper, we integrate service reward, electricity cost, carbon taxes and service performance to study cost-effective request scheduling for cloud data centers. We propose an online and distributed scheduling algorithm CESA to chieve the flexible tradeoff between these conflicting objectives. The time complexity of CESA is polynomial, and it can be implemented in a parallel way. CESA requires no prior knowledge of the statistics of request arrivals or future electricity prices, yet it provably approximates the optimal system profit while bounding the queue length. Real-trace based simulations are conducted which verify the effectiveness of our CESA algorithm.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.020

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.068
GPT teacher head0.308
Teacher spread0.240 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations4
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicCloud Computing and Resource ManagementFrench-language works237,207