MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2921252202 · doi:10.1002/cpe.5237

An efficient virtual machine allocation algorithm for parallel and distributed simulation applications

2019· article· en· W2921252202 on OpenAlexaff
Feng Yao, Yiping Yao, Huangke Chen, Tianlin Li, Menglong Lin, Xiaoxiong Zhang

Bibliographic record

VenueConcurrency and Computation Practice and Experience · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicCloud Computing and Resource Management
Canadian institutionsUniversity of WaterlooUniversity of Alberta
FundersNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsComputer scienceVirtual machineLatency (audio)Distributed computingExecution timeScheduling (production processes)Cloud computingSynchronization (alternating current)AlgorithmParallel computingOperating systemComputer network

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Summary Allocating appropriate resource for parallel and distributed simulation (PADS) applications in clouds is an intuitive way to improve their execution efficiency. However, the heterogeneity of virtual machine (VMs) in clouds with respect to both their computing power and network latency influences the execution efficiency of PADS applications on different combinations of VMs. Besides, frequent synchronization is one of the characteristics during the execution of PADS applications, which seriously challenges the prediction of the influence of VMs' computing power and network latency on their execution efficiency, and makes allocating appropriate VMs difficult as a result. This paper first proposes a revivification‐based prediction model (ERP), which revives the execution based on statistical data from actual execution of PADS applications to predict the running time of PADS applications on different combinations of VMs. Then, an ERP‐based Allocation algorithm, namely, ERPA, is raised to optimize VMs allocation to minimize the running time of PADS applications in clouds. A series of experiments are conducted to compare the proposed ERPA with three resource allocation algorithms, ie, Gang‐scheduling‐based, Makespan‐based, and Max‐Min‐based algorithms, and the experimental results demonstrate the advantage of ERPA in improving execution efficiency of PADS applications in clouds. In particular, for communication‐sensitive PADS applications, the advantage of ERPA is more significant.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.846
Threshold uncertainty score0.482

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.315
Teacher spread0.301 · 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.

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

Citations4
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueConcurrency and Computation Practice and ExperienceSame topicCloud Computing and Resource ManagementFrench-language works237,207