MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Partial Granger causality-based feature selection algorithm for workload prediction in cloud systems

2023· article· en· W4391129362 on OpenAlexaff
Changhoon Lee, Eunsoo Ko, Minjae Song, Hoyeong Yun, Wooju Kim

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicTraffic Prediction and Management Techniques
Canadian institutionsArtificial Intelligence in Medicine (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCloud computingFeature selectionComputer scienceMetric (unit)Causality (physics)Variable (mathematics)Multivariate statisticsTime seriesData miningWorkloadGranger causalityArtificial intelligenceMachine learningInferenceFeature (linguistics)Key (lock)Performance metricAlgorithmMathematicsEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The development of the cloud technology led to the rising interest in multi/hybrid cloud and emergence of artificial intelligence for IT operations(AIOps). The core elements of AIOps involve predicting how each metric of the data center will change in the future. Compared to general multivariate time-series prediction problems, causal relationships between each variable have a significant impact on cloud metric prediction. This paper focuses on the causality between variables, which partially arises when a specific event occurs in a cloud data center to achieve good predictive performance. The proposed model detects partial causality and sums it up again to extract key variables that explain the target variable well. Through this, variables with higher predictive performance than existing methods were found. We also propose a structure that improves the performance of the prediction model and minimizes inference time through a variable selection technique based on partial causality. By applying this to the actual operating cloud environment, it was proved that it can be effectively applied to the real world.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.017

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.232
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations1
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicTraffic Prediction and Management TechniquesFrench-language works237,207