MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2973341182 · doi:10.3390/e21090902

Optimization of Big Data Scheduling in Social Networks

2019· article· en· W2973341182 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueEntropy · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAI and Multimedia in Education
Canadian institutionsBrandon University
FundersNatural Science Foundation of Inner Mongolia
KeywordsComputer scienceBig dataScheduling (production processes)Fair-share schedulingDynamic priority schedulingEntropy (arrow of time)Two-level schedulingRate-monotonic schedulingDistributed computingMathematical optimizationData miningQuality of serviceComputer networkMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In social network big data scheduling, it is easy for target data to conflict in the same data node. Of the different kinds of entropy measures, this paper focuses on the optimization of target entropy. Therefore, this paper presents an optimized method for the scheduling of big data in social networks and also takes into account each task’s amount of data communication during target data transmission to construct a big data scheduling model. Firstly, the task scheduling model is constructed to solve the problem of conflicting target data in the same data node. Next, the necessary conditions for the scheduling of tasks are analyzed. Then, the a periodic task distribution function is calculated. Finally, tasks are scheduled based on the minimum product of the corresponding resource level and the minimum execution time of each task is calculated. Experimental results show that our optimized scheduling model quickly optimizes the scheduling of social network data and solves the problem of strong data collision.

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.

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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.851
Threshold uncertainty score0.146

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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.281
Teacher spread0.244 · 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