MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2729578352 · doi:10.1109/ccgrid.2017.147

Cloud Resource Scaling for Big Data Streaming Applications Using a Layered Multi-dimensional Hidden Markov Model

2017· article· en· W2729578352 on OpenAlexaff
Olubisi Runsewe, Nancy Samaan

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicCloud Computing and Resource Management
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsProvisioningComputer scienceCloud computingBig dataHidden Markov modelScalingResource (disambiguation)Focus (optics)Distributed computingData miningComputer networkArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Recent advancements in technology have led to a deluge of data that require real-time analysis with strict latency constraints. A major challenge, however, is determining the amount of resources required by big data stream processing applications in response to heterogeneous data sources, streaming events, unpredictable data volume and velocity changes. Over-provisioning of resources for peak loads can be wasteful while under-provisioning can have a huge impact on the performance of the streaming applications. The majority of research efforts on resource scaling in the cloud are investigated from the cloud provider's perspective, they focus on web applications and do not consider multiple resource bottlenecks. We aim at analyzing the resource scaling problem from a big data streaming application provider's point of view such that efficient scaling decisions can be made for future resource utilization. This paper proposes a Layered Multi-dimensional Hidden Markov Model (LMD-HMM) for facilitating the management of resource auto-scaling for big data streaming applications in the cloud. Our detailed experimental evaluation shows that LMD-HMM performs best with an accuracy of 98%, outperforming the single-layer hidden markov model.

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 categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.760
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

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 studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0040.004
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 head0.135
GPT teacher head0.325
Teacher spread0.191 · 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.

Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations17
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicCloud Computing and Resource ManagementFrench-language works237,207