MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2579398908 · doi:10.5555/3375069.3375078

Predicting Web Service Response Time Percentiles

2016· article· en· W2579398908 on OpenAlexaff
Yasaman Amannejad, Diwakar Krishnamurthy, Behrouz H. Far

Bibliographic record

VenueConference on Network and Service Management · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicSoftware System Performance and Reliability
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsResponse timeComputer sciencePercentileWorkloadService (business)Web serviceReal-time computingData miningWorld Wide WebStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Predicting Web service response time percentiles is often an important aspect of service level management exercises. Existing techniques can be very time consuming since they involve the manual construction of complex analytic or simulation models. To address this problem, we propose Prospective, a fully automated and data-driven approach for predicting Web service response time percentiles. Prospective relies on historical response time data collected from a Web service. Given a specification for workload expected at the Web service over a planning horizon, Prospective uses this historical data to offer predictions for response time percentiles of interest. At the core of Prospective is a lightweight simulator that uses collaborative filtering to estimate response time behaviour of the service based on behaviour observed historically. Results show that Prospective is able to predict various response time percentiles of interest with high accuracy for a wide variety of workloads.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.018

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.221
Teacher spread0.206 · 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

Citations6
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueConference on Network and Service ManagementSame topicSoftware System Performance and ReliabilityFrench-language works237,207