Generic input template for cloud simulators: A case study of CloudSim
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Summary Cloud computing and its service models, such as Platform as a Service (PaaS), have changed the way that computing resources are allocated to Information and Communications Technology enterprises and users. Although multiple cloud providers support dynamic service provisioning, it is necessary to facilitate the management of the cloud infrastructure and applications in order to allow the continuous refinement of cloud models. Therefore, issues are raised regarding the cloud orchestration, including the flexible portability and interoperability of cloud applications among multiple cloud providers. Having said that, there is a need for a standardized design and management of the cloud use cases (during the creation of scenarios, application's deployment, and patching) to ensure efficient applications' migration between different providers. This paper proposes an artifact, GITS, a generic input template for CloudSim and other cloud simulators. GITS can be provided by PaaS offering to manage the creation, monitoring, administration, and patching of infrastructure and applications in the cloud. GITS defines the cloud schema that can be used with conforming cloud models and independent cloud providers; thus, portability and interoperability can be enabled in PaaS cloud models. GITS focuses on the architecture‐based modeling for cloud infrastructure and application not only in terms of computational resources but also in terms of high availability properties associated with infrastructure and applications. The main objective of the GITS template is to provide the cloud user with a modular, simple, readable, and reusable model that still supports the essential components and provide them with the ability to control the applications' execution, deployment, and other management needs in addition to the allocation environment. This paper describes GITS usage, specifically as an input template for CloudSim.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".