PCP-ACO: a deadline-constrained workflow scheduling algorithm for cloud environment
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract A cloud computing environment is the most popular choice for workflow execution, as it gives customers on-demand access to computing resources. However, in cloud workflow scheduling, cloud-native requirements regarding QoS requirements such as monetary cost and execution time should be taken into account. This paper proposes PCP-ACO, a list scheduling algorithm for minimizing the execution cost of a workflow, while meeting its user-defined deadline in cloud environments. In PCP-ACO, first a topological sort of the workflow tasks is computed to assign a priority to each task. Then, Ant Colony Optimization (ACO) meta-heuristic is used to assign a proper resource to each task of the workflow, in order of their priorities. The Partial Critical Path (PCP) concept is also used as a heuristic to guide ACO algorithm. Several experiments are conducted using real scientific workflows, and the cost saving is compared with PSO and IC-PCP algorithms. The experimental results show that the proposed algorithm outperforms other compared algorithms in terms of cost saving.
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 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 | 0.005 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.014 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".