MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3038188974 · doi:10.1109/access.2020.3007469

Dynamic Resource Management for Cloud Spot Markets

2020· article· en· W3038188974 on OpenAlexaff
Fadi Alzhouri, Suhib Bani Melhem, Anjali Agarwal, Mustafa Daraghmeh, Yan Liu, Sadeq Younis

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Access · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicCloud Computing and Resource Management
Canadian institutionsConcordia UniversityYork UniversityUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCloud computingComputer scienceResource management (computing)Spare partRevenueResource (disambiguation)Virtual machineResource allocationDistributed computingBusinessOperating systemComputer networkMarketingFinance

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Resource management for cloud computing environments that are characterized by many layers emerges as a critical task for cloud computing providers. Such providers are compelled by the demands and strategies of stochastic customers to adopt dynamic resource management for the top-bottom scaling of the cloud resources on the basis of variable needs. Resource management in the infrastructure as a service layer relies on virtual machine (VM) characteristics, such as estimated VM classes. Given that a cloud provider offers a variety of VM classes that differ as regards the size of computing resources (e.g., central processing unit, memory, and input/output devices), optimizing cloud resources to maximize cloud revenue is a challenging dilemma. More specifically, the dynamic management of resources in cloud spot markets is confronted with various severe obstacles. In consideration of these issues, this study investigated a dynamic resource management model for cloud spot markets and put forward an efficient model that manages spare resources for the purpose of expanding cloud revenue. The model estimates the available spare capacity of a spot market, evaluates the maximum expected revenue of stagnant VMs on the basis estimated cumulative capacity, and locates the optimum VM combinations that bear complementary workloads and capacities and can coexist in a certain host. Our model also improves the understanding of cloud resource scaling and generates inferences that can be adopted in managing cloud resources for all layers as well as Reserved and On-Demand markets.

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 score0.881
Threshold uncertainty score0.714

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 science0.0030.001
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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.274
Teacher spread0.250 · 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

Citations9
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE AccessSame topicCloud Computing and Resource ManagementFrench-language works237,207