Geriatrix: aging what you see and what you don't see a file system aging approach for modern storage systems
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
File system performance on modern primary storage devices (Flash-based SSDs) is greatly affected by aging of the free space, much more so than were mechanical disk drives. We introduce Geriatrix, a simple-to-use profile driven file system aging tool that induces target levels of fragmentation in both allocated files (what you see) and remaining free space (what you don't see), unlike previous approaches that focus on just the former. This paper describes and evaluates the effectiveness of Geriatrix, showing that it recreates both fragmentation effects better than previous approaches. Using Geriatrix, we show that measurements presented in many recent file systems papers are higher than should be expected, by up to 30% on mechanical (HDD) and up to 80% on Flash (SSD) disks. Worse, in some cases, the performance rank ordering of file system designs being compared are different from the published results. Geriatrix will be released as open source software with eight built-in aging profiles, in the hopes that it can address the need created by the increased performance impact of file system aging in modern SSD-based storage.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.009 |
| 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