MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4234525794 · doi:10.1145/2491899.2465572

A two-step optimization technique for functions placement, partitioning, and priority assignment in distributed systems

2013· article· en· W4234525794 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

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicReal-Time Systems Scheduling
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSoftware deploymentComputer scienceScheduling (production processes)Integer programmingDistributed computingLinear programmingProcessor schedulingExecution timeGenetic algorithmMathematical optimizationComputer networkAlgorithm

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Modern development methodologies from the industry and the academia for complex real-time systems define a stage in which application functions are deployed onto an execution platform. The deployment consists of the placement of functions on a distributed network of nodes, the partitioning of functions in tasks and the scheduling of tasks and messages. None of the existing optimization techniques deal with the three stages of the deployment problem at the same time. In this paper, we present a staged approach towards the efficient deployment of real-time functions based on genetic algorithms and mixed integer linear programming techniques. Application to case studies shows the applicability of the method to industry-size systems and the quality of the obtained solutions when compared to the true optimum for small size examples.

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)0.001
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 score0.787
Threshold uncertainty score0.445

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.248
Teacher spread0.234 · 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

Quick stats

Citations12
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicReal-Time Systems SchedulingFrench-language works237,207