EnLoB: Energy and Load Balancing-Driven Container Placement Strategy for Data Centers
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cloud data centers (DCs) can be aptly regarded as the epicenter of today's business and economy; which support seamless data processing, analysis, and storage. However, various studies advocate that the existing DCs are often underutilized. To be precise, almost 30% of the installed DCs in the United States are comatose. In addition to this, the existing DC architecture leads to extensive energy utilization, which severely hampers the environment and places a severe risk on the power sector. Thus, it is highly essential to reduce DC's energy utilization through efficient resource consolidation approaches. In this work, we investigate the joint impact of resource consolidation and load balancing on cutting down the energy utilization indices of the cloud DCs. In this vein, we formulate a multi-objective optimization problem (MOOP) for container placement across heterogeneous infrastructure, primarily with the intent to minimize the overall energy consumption and balance the load amongst the operating hosts. However, due to the hardness of the underlying problem and its infeasibility to furnish optimal solutions in polynomial time, we designed an online solution based on the incremental exploration of the solution space to map containers on the available array of hosts such that the objectives mentioned above can be attained. Finally, we evaluated the performance of the proposed algorithm in contrast to an existing algorithm on real-time workload traces obtained from PlanetLab. The obtained results confirm the superior performance of the proposed algorithm relative state-of-the-art.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".