MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2898083717 · doi:10.1109/tcc.2018.2878023

Maximizing Cloud Revenue using Dynamic Pricing of Multiple Class Virtual Machines

2018· article· en· W2898083717 on OpenAlexaff
Fadi Alzhouri, Anjali Agarwal, Yan Liu

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Cloud Computing · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicCloud Computing and Resource Management
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCloud computingDynamic pricingComputer scienceRevenueVirtual machineRevenue managementMathematical optimizationDynamic programmingMarkov decision processOrder (exchange)Markov processOperations researchDistributed computingEconomicsMicroeconomicsAlgorithmEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Infrastructure as a Service (IaaS) cloud industry that relies on leasing virtual machines (VMs) has significant portion of business values of finding the dynamic equilibrium between two conflicting phenomena: underutilization and surging congestion. Spot instance has been proposed as an elegant solution to overcome these challenges, with the ultimate goal to achieve greater profits. However, previous studies on recent spot pricing schemes reveal artificial pricing policies that do not comply with the dynamic nature of these phenomena. Motivated by these facts, this paper investigates dynamic pricing of stagnant resources in order to maximize cloud revenue. Specifically, our proposed approach manages multiple classes of virtual machines in order to achieve the maximum expected revenue within a finite discrete time horizon. For this sake, the proposed approach leverages the Markov decision processes with a number of properties under optimum controlling conditions that characterize a model's behaviour. Further, this approach applies approximate stochastic dynamic programming using linear programming to create a practical model. Experimental results confirm that this approach of dynamic pricing can scale up or down the price efficiently and effectively, according to the stagnant resources and the load thresholds. These results provide significant insights to maximizing the IaaS cloud revenue.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.260
Teacher spread0.241 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations26
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Cloud ComputingSame topicCloud Computing and Resource ManagementFrench-language works237,207