MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2972504787 · doi:10.3233/jifs-190459

Resource-utilization-aware task scheduling in cloud platform using three-way clustering

2019· article· en· W2972504787 on OpenAlexaff
Chunmao Jiang, Duan Ying, Jun Yao

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Intelligent & Fuzzy Systems · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicCloud Computing and Resource Management
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Regina
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCluster analysisComputer scienceCloudSimEnergy consumptionCloud computingScheduleData miningScheduling (production processes)Distributed computingArtificial intelligenceMathematical optimizationMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Task clustering is an effective approach of improving cloud computing resource utilization, which includes other benefits such as better QoS, load balance and low energy consumption. Different existing clustering methods have sharp boundaries, three-way clustering as an application of three-way decision, uses core region and fringe region to represent a cluster. In this paper, we propose a novel idea of clustering weight algorithm called TWCW algorithm(Three-way clustering weight) based on three-way decision to overcome the low utilization aiming at improving energy-efficient. The algorithm encompasses two steps, the identified tasks are assigned into the core region and the uncertain tasks are assigned into the fringe region based on diversity of cloud tasks and the dynamic nature of resources using the three-way K-means clustering firstly. The cluster center of CS i , centroid i = { mips , ram , bw } is obtained from the result of three-way clustering. In the second step is to score clusters and schedule tasks. We define a scoring matrix to record scores of the weight between clusters and the preference of attributes within clusters according to the cluster center, and then schedule tasks based on scoring matrix. We validate the high utilization of resources of the proposed algorithm by using simulation of CloudSim. The experiment shows the proposed algorithms significantly reduce energy consumption while significant improving response time of tasks comparing with K-means algorithm and FCM algorithm.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.029

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.049
GPT teacher head0.272
Teacher spread0.223 · 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 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

Citations18
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Intelligent & Fuzzy SystemsSame topicCloud Computing and Resource ManagementFrench-language works237,207