MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2911428714

The 2014 ACM international conference on Measurement and modeling of computer systems

2014· article· en· W2911428714 on OpenAlexaffabout
Sujay Sanghavi, Sanjay Shakkottai, Marc Lelarge, Bianca Schroeder

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicSoftware System Performance and Reliability
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer sciencePublicationLibrary scienceProvisioningOperations researchSpecial Interest GroupTelecommunicationsEngineeringPolitical science
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

It is our pleasure to welcome you to SIGMETRICS 2014. SIGMETRICS is the flagship conference of the ACM special interest group for the computer systems performance evaluation community. This year's conference continues the long-standing SIGMETRICS tradition to publish the highestquality research on the development and application of state-of-the-art, broadly applicable analytic, simulation, and measurement-based performance evaluation techniques. We are pleased to present a diverse set of papers in areas such as sensor, mobile and wireless networks, queuing and scheduling, msocial networks, memory technologies, large-scale measurement studies, system tracing and monitoring, data center resource provisioning and energy management. Our authors hail from 13 countries on 4 continents and represent both academia and industry. SIGMETRICS 2014 received 237 submissions, the second highest number since the founding of this SIG. Of these, we accepted 40 papers, the largest in the history of the conference, while still maintaining a highly competitive acceptance rate of 16.8%. During the review process, the Program Committee provided 4-6 reviews for each paper and made extensive use of HotCRP's Comment feature for online discussions. The Program Committee then met in person in a 1.5-day meeting on February 7-8, 2014, in Toronto, Canada, and selected 40 papers to be included as full papers in the technical program. In addition, 31 papers were invited as 2-page posters, and the authors of 30 of these papers accepted our invitation. As an experiment, we invited for the first time also all authors of full papers to present a poster version of their paper during one of the breaks at the conference to foster interaction between authors and attendees. We used Eddie Kohler's excellent HotCRP software to manage all stages of the review process, from submission to author notification.

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)0.009
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.029
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.064
Threshold uncertainty score0.213

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0090.029
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.002
Bibliometrics0.0030.004
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0100.007
Open science0.0040.005
Research integrity0.0030.007
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0640.033

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 head0.061
GPT teacher head0.264
Teacher spread0.202 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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

Citations8
Published2014
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicSoftware System Performance and ReliabilityFrench-language works237,207