MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2953953553 · doi:10.1109/icse.2019.00114

GreenBundle: An Empirical Study on the Energy Impact of Bundled Processing

2019· article· en· W2953953553 on OpenAlexafffund
Shaiful Chowdhury, Abram Hindle, Rick Kazman, T. Shuto, Ken Matsui, Yasutaka Kamei

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicGreen IT and Sustainability
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersJapan Society for the Promotion of ScienceNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaNational Science Foundation
KeywordsEnergy consumptionComputer scienceBenchmark (surveying)SoftwareEnergy (signal processing)Embedded systemSoftware architectureCode refactoringArchitectureMobile deviceEnhanced Data Rates for GSM EvolutionConsumption (sociology)Efficient energy useSoftware deploymentSimple (philosophy)Data centerSoftware engineeringOperating systemTelecommunicationsEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Energy consumption is a concern in the data-center and at the edge, on mobile devices such as smartphones. Software that consumes too much energy threatens the utility of the end-user's mobile device. Energy consumption is fundamentally a systemic kind of performance and hence it should be addressed at design time via a software architecture that supports it, rather than after release, via some form of refactoring. Unfortunately developers often lack knowledge of what kinds of designs and architectures can help address software energy consumption. In this paper we show that some simple design choices can have significant effects on energy consumption. In particular we examine the Model-View-Controller architectural pattern and demonstrate how converting to Model-View-Presenter with bundling can improve the energy performance of both benchmark systems and real world applications. We show the relationship between energy consumption and bundled and delayed view updates: bundling events in the presenter can often reduce energy consumption by 30%.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.069
Threshold uncertainty score0.390

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.296
Teacher spread0.277 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations13
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicGreen IT and SustainabilityFrench-language works237,207