MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4283121050 · doi:10.3390/en15124469

Harnessing Task Usage Prediction and Latency Sensitivity for Scheduling Workloads in Wind-Powered Data Centers

2022· article· en· W4283121050 on OpenAlexaff
Idun Osnes, Anis Yazidi, Hans‐Arno Jacobsen, Frank Eliassen, Sabrina Sartori

Bibliographic record

VenueEnergies · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicCloud Computing and Resource Management
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsData centerProvisioningWorkloadComputer scienceServerLatency (audio)Real-time computingRenewable energyScheduling (production processes)Wind powerEfficient energy useEngineeringComputer networkOperating systemTelecommunicationsOperations managementElectrical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The growing number of data centers consumes a vast amount of energy for processing. There is a desire to reduce the environmental footprint of the IT industry, and one way to achieve this is to use renewable energy sources. A challenge with using renewable resources is that the energy output is irregular as a consequence of the intermittent nature of this form of energy. In this paper, we propose a simple and yet efficient latency-aware workload scheduler that creates an energy-agile workload, by deferring tasks with low latency sensitivity to periods with excess renewable energy. The scheduler also increases the overall efficiency of the data center, by packing the workload into as few servers as possible, using neural-network-based predictions of resource usage on an individual task basis to avoid unnecessarily provisioning an excess number of servers. The scheduler was tested on a subset of real-world workload traces, and real-world wind-power generation data, simulating a small-scale data center co-located with a wind turbine. Extensive experimental results show that the devised scheduler reduced the number of servers doing work in periods of low wind-power production up to 93% of the time, by postponing tasks with a low latency sensitivity to a later interval.

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)0.001
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.092
Threshold uncertainty score0.400

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 communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.002
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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.243
Teacher spread0.219 · 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

Citations4
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEnergiesSame topicCloud Computing and Resource ManagementFrench-language works237,207