MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4405647145 · doi:10.1145/3708993

Holographic Storage for the Cloud: advances and challenges

2024· article· en· W4405647145 on OpenAlexaff
Nathanaël Cheriere, Jiaqi Chu, Grace Brennan, Pashmina Cameron, Pedro F. da Costa, Jannes Gladrow, Guilherme Ilunga, Douglas J. Kelly, Sarah Lewis, Joowon Lim, Giorgio Maltese, Tony Mason, Greg O’Shea, Soujanya Ponnapalli, Michael Rudow, Alan Sanders, Theano Stavrinos, Xingbo Wu, Mengyang Yang, Dushyanth Narayanan, Benn C. Thomsen, Antony Rowstron

Bibliographic record

VenueACM Transactions on Storage · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAdvanced Data Storage Technologies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceCloud computingHolographyCloud storageOperating systemOpticsPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Holographic Storage is an old idea that has always promised high density and fast random access, but has never been commercially competitive with Hard Disk Drives (HDDs) and Solid State Devices (SSDs). In Project HSD at Microsoft Research we asked the question: “Does holographic storage finally make sense for cloud storage?” This article describes our journey toward answering this question. We achieved 1.8× higher density than the previous state-of-the-art, using commodity components available today and leveraging machine learning to compensate for the noise and distortions introduced by commodity components. This uncovered two new challenges which are the focus of this article: achieving high end-to-end energy efficiency without sacrificing capacity, and spatial multiplexing without mechanical movement. Improving end-to-end energy efficiency requires joint optimization across low-level media parameters and higher-level system parameters that govern background maintenance operations such as read refresh and garbage collection. We developed new physics models of the media; analytic and simulation models of the media access and background media maintenance; and workload-driven optimization to find optimal parameter combinations. These techniques resulted in a 14× improvement over the previous approach for typical workloads without sacrificing capacity. We also designed the first scalable and mechanical movement free spatial multiplexing system for holographic storage. Despite these advances, we conclude that currently, holographic storage is still far from the combination of density, capacity scaling, and energy efficiency needed to compete with the incumbent technologies. We need fundamental advances in the physical media that improve energy efficiency by another 1–2 orders of magnitude without reducing data density. Further advances in optics are also required to achieve spatial multiplexing that is simultaneously scalable, low-loss, and high-density.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.026

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0040.011
Open science0.0030.003
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.003

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 head0.043
GPT teacher head0.286
Teacher spread0.244 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations7
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueACM Transactions on StorageSame topicAdvanced Data Storage TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207