Big Data Resource Management & Networks: Taxonomy, Survey, and Future Directions
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Big Data (BD) platforms have a long tradition of leveraging trends and technologies from the broader computer network and communication community. For several years, dedicated servers of homogeneous clusters were employed as the dominant paradigm in BD networks. In recent years, the BD landscape has changed, porting different deployment architectures with various network models. This trend has resulted in various associated opportunities and challenges that induce BD practitioners to achieve the next-generation BD vision. In particular, addressing the BD velocity with batch and micro-batch processing. Nevertheless, the literature misses an extensive study of the associated impacts of adopting these new deployment architectures, giving it holds a significant research interest. This study addresses the previous concern, offering a comprehensive review of the architectural elements of BD batch query deployment models and environments. A novel taxonomy is proposed to classify these models based on their underlying communication systems. We first discuss the batch query processing requirements as comparison criteria of BD communication models and compare their salient features. The benefits/challenges of these environments away from BD traditional on-premise dedicated clusters are presented. Thereafter, we provide an extensive survey of the modern BD deployment architectures, categorizing them based on their underlying infrastructure. Finally, several directions are outlined for future research on improving the state-of-the-art of BD landscape and provide recommendations for the BD practitioners on emerging environments supporting BD applications and the general large-scale data analytics.
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 | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.006 | 0.011 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.011 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".