MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

A Graph-based Data Mining Approach for Template Recognition using Large Log Datasets in Software Systems

2024· article· en· W4401114488 on OpenAlexaff
Claudia Crespo Julio, Ahmed Shaharyar Khwaja, Isaac Woungang, Alagan Anpalagan

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicData Mining Algorithms and Applications
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceData miningSoftwareGraphPattern recognition (psychology)Artificial intelligenceTheoretical computer scienceOperating system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Log files generated by software systems can be utilized as a valuable resource in data-driven approaches to improve the system health and stability. These files often contain valuable information about runtime execution, and their effective monitoring requires analyzing an increasingly large volume of data logs. In this paper, a graph mining technique for log parsing is presented, which is source agnostic to the system. This means that the technique can function regardless of the source of the logs, making it more scalable and reusable. Unlike the existing approaches that rely heavily on domain knowledge and regular expression patterns, the proposed approach uses graph models and semantic analysis to detect data patterns with minimal user input. This makes it easy to implement it in a variety of scenarios where application-based logs may differ significantly. The proposed parsing technique is evaluated over seven datasets. It achieves the best performance on the Thunderbird dataset, where the technique takes 3.87 seconds for 2000 logs, while obtaining precision, recall and F1 measure higher than 0.99.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.021

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0080.006
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.149
GPT teacher head0.338
Teacher spread0.189 · 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
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicData Mining Algorithms and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207