MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

The Evolution of Cloud Computing in ATLAS

2015· article· en· W2529253071 on OpenAlexaff
R. Taylor, F. Berghaus, F Brasolin, C Cordeiro, Ron Desmarais, Laurence Field, Ian Gable, Domenico Giordano, A. Di Girolamo, John Hover, M. LeBlanc, P. A. Love, Michael Paterson, Randall Sobie, Alexandr Zaytsev

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Physics Conference Series · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicDistributed and Parallel Computing Systems
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Victoria
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCloud computingComputer scienceDistributed computingGrid computingServerGridCloud testingData scienceCloud computing securityOperating systemGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The ATLAS experiment has successfully incorporated cloud computing technology and cloud resources into its primarily grid-based model of distributed computing. Cloud R&D activities continue to mature and transition into stable production systems, while ongoing evolutionary changes are still needed to adapt and refine the approaches used, in response to changes in prevailing cloud technology. In addition, completely new developments are needed to handle emerging requirements. This paper describes the overall evolution of cloud computing in ATLAS. The current status of the virtual machine (VM) management systems used for harnessing infrastructure as a service (IaaS) resources are discussed. Monitoring and accounting systems tailored for clouds are needed to complete the integration of cloud resources within ATLAS' distributed computing framework. We are developing and deploying new solutions to address the challenge of operation in a geographically distributed multi-cloud scenario, including a system for managing VM images across multiple clouds, a system for dynamic location-based discovery of caching proxy servers, and the usage of a data federation to unify the worldwide grid of storage elements into a single namespace and access point. The usage of the experiment's high level trigger (HLT) farm for Monte Carlo production, in a specialized cloud environment, is presented. Finally, we evaluate and compare the performance of commercial clouds using several benchmarks.

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 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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.811
Threshold uncertainty score0.245

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 studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.256
Teacher spread0.224 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations12
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Physics Conference SeriesSame topicDistributed and Parallel Computing SystemsFrench-language works237,207