MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2742147615 · doi:10.5539/cis.v10n3p29

A Holistic Decision Framework to Avoid Vendor Lock-in for Cloud SaaS Migration

2017· article· en· W2742147615 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.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueComputer and Information Science · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicCloud Computing and Resource Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCloud computingSoftware as a serviceVendorComputer scienceVariety (cybernetics)Lock (firearm)Total cost of ownershipService (business)Service providerProcess managementComputer securityRisk analysis (engineering)SoftwareBusinessMarketingSoftware developmentOperating systemEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cloud computing offers an innovative business model to enterprise for IT services consumption and delivery. Software as a Service (SaaS) is one of the cloud offerings that attract organisations as a potential solution in reducing their IT cost. However, the vast diversity among the available cloud SaaS services makes it difficult for customers to decide whose vendor services to use or even to determine a valid basis for their selections. Moreover, this variety of cloud SaaS services has led to proprietary architectures and technologies being used by cloud vendors, increasing the risk of vendor lock-in for customers. Therefore, when enterprises interact with SaaS providers within the purview of the current cloud marketplace, they often encounter significant lock-in challenges to migrating and interconnecting cloud. Hence, the complexity and variety of cloud SaaS service offerings makes it imperative for businesses to use a clear and well understood decision process to procure, migrate and/or discontinue cloud services. To date, the expertise and technological solutions to simplify such transition and facilitate good decision making to avoid lock-in risks in the cloud are limited. Besides, little investigation has been carried out to provide a comprehensive decision framework to support enterprises on how to avoid lock-in risks when selecting and implementing cloud-based SaaS solutions within existing environments. Such decision framework is important to reduce complexity and variations in implementation patterns on the cloud provider side, while at the same time minimising potential switching cost for enterprises by resolving integration issues with existing IT infrastructures. This paper proposes a holistic 6-step decision framework that enables an enterprise to assess its current IT landscape for potential SaaS replacement, and provides effective strategies to mitigate vendor lock-in risks in cloud (SaaS) migration. The framework follows research findings and addresses the core requirements for choosing vendor-neutral interoperable and portable cloud services without the fear of vendor lock-in, and architectural decisions for secure SaaS migration. Therefore, the results of this research can help IT managers have a safe and effective migration to cloud computing SaaS environment.

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 categoriesScholarly communication
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 score0.902
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

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 studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.301
Teacher spread0.277 · 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