MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4287556996 · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2012.03005

Optimal Caching for Low Latency in Distributed Coded Storage Systems

2020· preprint· en· W4287556996 on OpenAlexaff
Kaiyang Liu, Jun Peng, Jingrong Wang, Jianping Pan

Bibliographic record

VenuearXiv (Cornell University) · 2020
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicCaching and Content Delivery
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoUniversity of Victoria
Fundersnot available
KeywordsErasure codeComputer scienceLatency (audio)Distributed data storeDistributed computingComputer networkComputer data storageData retrievalDecoding methodsAlgorithmData mining

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Erasure codes have been widely considered a promising solution to enhance data reliability at low storage costs. However, in modern geo-distributed storage systems, erasure codes may incur high data access latency as they require data retrieval from multiple remote storage nodes. This hinders the extensive application of erasure codes to data-intensive applications. This paper proposes novel caching schemes to achieve low latency in distributed coded storage systems. Experiments based on Amazon Simple Storage Service confirm the positive correlation between the latency and the physical distance of data retrieval. The average data access latency is used the performance metric to quantify the benefits of caching. Assuming that the future data popularity and network latency information is available, an offline caching scheme is proposed to find the optimal caching solution. Guided by the optimal scheme, an online caching scheme is proposed according to the measured data popularity and network latency information in real time. Experiment results demonstrate that the online scheme can approximate the optimal scheme well with dramatically reduced computation complexity.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
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 score0.666
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.073
GPT teacher head0.184
Teacher spread0.111 · 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.

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
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuearXiv (Cornell University)Same topicCaching and Content DeliveryFrench-language works237,207