Bibliographic record
Abstract
Although the Infrastructure-as-a-Service (IaaS) cloud offers diverse instance types to users, a significant portion of cloud users, especially those with small and short demands, cannot find an instance type that exactly fits their needs or fully utilize purchased instance-hours. In the meantime, cloud service providers are also faced with the challenge to consolidate small, short jobs, which exhibit strong dynamics, to effectively improve resource utilization. To handle such inefficiencies and improve cloud resource utilization, we propose Cocoa (COmputing in COntAiners) , a novel group buying mechanism that organizes jobs with complementary resource demands into groups and allocates them to group buying deals predefined by cloud providers. Each group buying deal offers a resource pool for all the jobs in the deal, which can be implemented as either a virtual machine or a physical server. By running each user job on a virtualized container, our mechanism allows flexible resource sharing among different users in the same group buying deal, while improving resource utilization for cloud providers. To organize jobs with varied resource demands and durations into groups, we model the initial static group organization as a variable-sized vector bin packing problem, and the subsequent dynamic group organization problem as an online multidimensional knapsack problem. Through extensive simulations driven by a large amount of real usage traces from a Google cluster, we evaluate the potential cost reduction achieved by Cocoa . We show that through the effective combination and interaction of the proposed static and dynamic group organization strategies, Cocoa greatly outperforms the existing cloud workload consolidation mechanism, substantiating the feasibility of group buying in cloud computing.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.158 | 0.080 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".