MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2736063859 · doi:10.1109/icdcs.2017.291

Supporting Resource Control for Actor Systems in Akka

2017· article· en· W2736063859 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicDistributed and Parallel Computing Systems
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
Fundersnot available
KeywordsImplementationComputer scienceScheduling (production processes)Resource (disambiguation)Distributed computingControl (management)Software engineeringEngineeringComputer networkArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Although there are models and prototype implementations for controlling resource use in Actor systems, they are difficult to implement for production implementations of Actors such as Akka. This is because the messaging and scheduling infrastructures of runtime systems are increasingly complex and significantly different from one system to another. This paper presents our efforts in implementing resource control support for Actor systems implemented using the Akka library. Particularly, given the lack of support in Akka for direct scheduling of actors, we compare two different ways of approximating actor-level control support. The first implementation expects messages to actors to provide estimates of resources likely to be consumed for processing them; these estimates are then relied upon to make scheduling decisions. In the second implementation, resource use of scheduled actors is tracked, and compared against allocations to decide when they should be scheduled next. We present experimental results on the performance cost of these resource control mechanisms, as well as their impact on resource utilization.

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 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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.984
Threshold uncertainty score0.908

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 communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0020.000
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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.302
Teacher spread0.276 · 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