MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4247988984 · doi:10.1109/infcom.2012.6195813

Scaling social media applications into geo-distributed clouds

2012· article· en· W4247988984 on OpenAlexaff
Yu Wu, Chuan Wu, Bo Li, Linquan Zhang, Zongpeng Li, Francis C. M. Lau

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicCaching and Content Delivery
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCloud computingComputer scienceDistributed computingSocial mediaKey (lock)Bandwidth (computing)Big dataData scienceData miningComputer networkWorld Wide WebComputer security

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Federation of geo-distributed cloud services is a trend in cloud computing which, by spanning multiple data centers at different geographical locations, can provide a cloud platform with much larger capacities. Such a geo-distributed cloud is ideal for supporting large-scale social media streaming applications (e.g., YouTube-like sites) with dynamic contents and demands, owing to its abundant on-demand storage/bandwidth capacities and geographical proximity to different groups of users. Although promising, its realization presents challenges on how to efficiently store and migrate contents among different cloud sites (i.e. data centers), and to distribute user requests to the appropriate sites for timely responses at modest costs. These challenges escalate when we consider the persistently increasing contents and volatile user behaviors in a social media application. By exploiting social influences among users, this paper proposes efficient proactive algorithms for dynamic, optimal scaling of a social media application in a geo-distributed cloud. Our key contribution is an online content migration and request distribution algorithm with the following features: (1) future demand prediction by novelly characterizing social influences among the users in a simple but effective epidemic model; (2) oneshot optimal content migration and request distribution based on efficient optimization algorithms to address the predicted demand, and (3) a Δ(t)-step look-ahead mechanism to adjust the one-shot optimization results towards the offline optimum. We verify the effectiveness of our algorithm using solid theoretical analysis, as well as large-scale experiments under dynamic realistic settings on a home-built cloud platform.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.021

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.250
Teacher spread0.227 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations65
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicCaching and Content DeliveryFrench-language works237,207