Improving Storage System Reliability with Proactive Error Prediction
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper proposes using techniques from machine learning to make storage systems more reliable in the face of sector errors. Sector errors are partial drive failures, where individual sectors on a drive become unavailable, and occur at a high rate in both hard disk drives and solid state drives. The data in the affected sectors can only be recovered through external forms of redundancy (e.g. another drive in the same RAID), and be lost if the error is encountered while the system operates in degraded mode, e.g. during RAID reconstruction. In this paper, we explore a range of different machine learning techniques and show that sector errors can be predicted ahead of time with high accuracy. Prediction is robust, even when only little training data or only training data for a different drive model is available. We also discuss a number of possible use cases for improving storage system reliability through the use of sector error predictors. We evaluate one such use case in detail: We show that the mean time to detecting errors (and hence the window of vulnerability to data loss) can be greatly reduced by adapting the speed of a scrubber based on error predictions.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it