Efficient Prioritization and Processor Selection Schemes for HEFT Algorithm: A Makespan Optimizer for Task Scheduling in Cloud Environment
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cloud computing is one of the most commonly used infrastructures for carrying out activities using virtual machines known as processing units. One of the most fundamental issues with cloud computing is task scheduling. The optimal determination of scheduling criteria in cloud computing is a non-deterministic polynomial-time (NP)-complete optimization problem, and several procedures to manage this problem have been suggested by researchers in the past. Among these methods, the Heterogeneous Earliest Finish Time (HEFT) algorithm is recognized to produce optimal outcomes in a shorter time period for scheduling tasks in a heterogeneous environment. Literature shows that HEFT gives extraordinary results in terms of quality of schedule and execution time. However, in some cases, the average computation cost and selection of the first idle slot may not produce a good solution. Therefore, here we propose modified versions of the HEFT algorithm that can obtain improved results. In the rank generation phase, we implement different methodologies for calculating ranks, while in the processor selection phase, we modify the way of selecting idle slots for scheduling the tasks. This paper suggests enhanced versions of the HEFT algorithm under user-required financial constraints to minimize the makespan of a specified workflow submission on virtual machines. Our findings also suggest that enhanced versions of the HEFT algorithm perform better than the basic HEFT method in terms of lesser schedule length of the workflow problems running on various virtual machines.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it