MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Context-aware distributed cloud computing using CloudScheduler

2017· article· en· W2770448110 on OpenAlexaff
R. Seuster, CR Leavett-Brown, Kevin Casteels, Colson Driemel, Matthew Paterson, Dominic Ring, R. Sobie, R. Taylor, Jodie Weldon

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Physics Conference Series · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicDistributed and Parallel Computing Systems
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Victoria
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCloud computingProvisioningComputer scienceVirtual machineContext (archaeology)Distributed computingOperating system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The distributed cloud using the CloudScheduler VM provisioning service is one of the longest running systems for HEP workloads. It has run millions of jobs for ATLAS and Belle II over the past few years using private and commercial clouds around the world. Our goal is to scale the distributed cloud to the 10,000-core level, with the ability to run any type of application (low I/O, high I/O and high memory) on any cloud. To achieve this goal, we have been implementing changes that utilize context-aware computing designs that are currently employed in the mobile communication industry. Context-awareness makes use of real-time and archived data to respond to user or system requirements. In our distributed cloud, we have many opportunistic clouds with no local HEP services, software or storage repositories. A context-aware design significantly improves the reliability and performance of our system by locating the nearest location of the required services. We describe how we are collecting and managing contextual information from our workload management systems, the clouds, the virtual machines and our services. This information is used not only to monitor the system but also to carry out automated corrective actions. We are incrementally adding new alerting and response services to our distributed cloud. This will enable us to scale the number of clouds and virtual machines. Further, a context-aware design will enable us to run analysis or high I/O application on opportunistic clouds. We envisage an open-source HTTP data federation (for example, the DynaFed system at CERN) as a service that would provide us access to existing storage elements used by the HEP experiments.

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 categoriesScholarly communication
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.877
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
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 head0.056
GPT teacher head0.293
Teacher spread0.237 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations0
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Physics Conference SeriesSame topicDistributed and Parallel Computing SystemsFrench-language works237,207