MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2522585932 · doi:10.5555/3026877.3026924

Non-intrusive performance profiling for entire software stacks based on the flow reconstruction principle

2016· article· en· W2522585932 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueOperating Systems Design and Implementation · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicSoftware System Performance and Reliability
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceProfiling (computer programming)SoftwareA priori and a posterioriRoot causeParallel computingDistributed computingOperating systemReliability engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Understanding the performance behavior of distributed server stacks at scale is non-trivial. The servicing of just a single request can trigger numerous sub-requests across heterogeneous software components; and many similar requests are serviced concurrently and in parallel. When a user experiences poor performance, it is extremely difficult to identify the root cause, as well as the software components and machines that are the culprits.This paper describes Stitch, a non-intrusive tool capable of profiling the performance of an entire distributed software stack solely using the unstructured logs output by heterogeneous software components. Stitch is substantially different from all prior related tools in that it is capable of constructing a system model of an entire software stack without building any domain knowledge into Stitch. Instead, it automatically reconstructs the extensive domain knowledge of the programmers who wrote the code; it does this by relying on the Flow Reconstruction Principle which states that programmers log events such that one can reliably reconstruct the execution flow a posteriori.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.946
Threshold uncertainty score0.519

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.281
Teacher spread0.259 · 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