MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3201753488 · doi:10.32920/ryerson.14655171.v1

End-to-end QoS computation for vertical service composition in the cloud

2021· preprint· en· W3201753488 on OpenAlexaff
Raed Karim

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicService-Oriented Architecture and Web Services
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCloud computingMobile QoSQuality of serviceComputer scienceService (business)Software as a serviceService providerScalabilityCloud testingService catalogData as a serviceComputer networkService designCloud computing securitySoftwareDatabaseBusinessSoftware developmentOperating system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cloud services are designed to provide users with different computing models such as software-as-a-Services (SaaS), Infrastructure-as-a-Service (IaaS), Data-as-a-Service (DaaS), and other IT related services (denoted as XaaS). Easy, scalable and on-demand cloud services are offered by cloud providers to users. With the prevalence of different types of cloud services, the task of selecting the best cloud service solution has become more and more challenging. Cloud service solutions are offered through a collaboration of different cloud services at different cloud layers. This type of collaborations is denoted as vertical service composition. Quality of Service (QoS) properties are used as differentiating factors for selecting the best services among functionally equivalent services. In this thesis, we introduce a new service selection framework for the cloud which vertically matches services offered by different cloud providers based on users’ end-to-end QoS requirements. Functional requirements can be satisfied by the required cloud service (software service, platform service, etc) alone. However, users’ QoS requirements must be satisfied using all involved cloud services in a service composition. Therefore, in order to select the best cloud service compositions for users, QoS values of these compositions must be end-to-end. To tackle the problem of computing unknown end-to-end QoS values of vertical cloud service compositions for target users (for whom these values are computed), we propose two strategies: QoS mapping and aggregation and QoS prediction. The former deals with new cloud service compositions with no prior history. Using this strategy, we can map users’ QoS requirements onto different cloud layers and then we aggregate QoS values guaranteed by cloud providers to estimate end-to-end QoS values. The latter deals with cloud service compositions for which QoS data have been recorded in an active system. Using the QoS prediction strategy, we utilize historical QoS data of previously invoked service compositions and other service and user information to predict end-to-end QoS values. The presented experimental results demonstrate the importance of considering vertically composed cloud services when computing end-to-end QoS values as opposed to traditional prediction approaches. Our QoS prediction approach outperforms other prediction approaches in terms of the prediction accuracy by at least 20%.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
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 score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.021

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.021
GPT teacher head0.279
Teacher spread0.258 · 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

Citations0
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicService-Oriented Architecture and Web ServicesFrench-language works237,207