MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2944883608 · doi:10.1109/pccc.2018.8711295

Availability-Aware Container Scheduler for Application Services in Cloud

2018· article· en· W2944883608 on OpenAlexaff
Yanal Alahmad, Tariq Daradkeh, Anjali Agarwal

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicCloud Computing and Resource Management
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCloud computingComputer scienceContainer (type theory)Scheduling (production processes)Virtual machineScheduleService providerHost (biology)Cloud service providerDistributed computingService (business)Operating systemComputer networkCloud computing securityEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cloud is a popular paradigm for providing online computing services to the end users. Recently many of the cloud service providers use containers instead of Virtual Machines (VMs) to host the applications. Using containers raises the application service availability concerns. Availability is a non-functional requirement that refers to the percentage of time the service is available for the end user. Scheduling containers (host application) on physical/virtual hosts has direct impact on the availability of the application service that is provided to the end user. According to the best of our knowledge, the existing container scheduling solutions do not directly address the availability of the application service. In this article we propose a new Availability-Aware container scheduling strategy that aims to increase the availability level of the application service in the cloud container-based platform. The strategy selects VMs and hosts that have higher availability values within constraints to schedule the containers in efficient way. We compare the proposed strategy with other container scheduling strategies that are used by Docker container platform. The results shown that the Availability-Aware strategy achieves higher service availability levels, and acceptable physical host CPU utilization.

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 score0.926
Threshold uncertainty score0.288

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 science0.0010.000
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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.249
Teacher spread0.239 · 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

Citations11
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicCloud Computing and Resource ManagementFrench-language works237,207