Adaptive Cache Management for Complex Storage Systems Using CNN-LSTM-Based Spatiotemporal Prediction
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper proposes an intelligent cache management strategy based on CNN-LSTM to improve the performance and cache hit rate of storage systems. Through comparative experiments with traditional algorithms (such as LRU and LFU) and other deep learning models (such as RNN, GRU-RNN and LSTM), the results show that the CNN-LSTM model has significant advantages in cache demand prediction. The MSE and MAE values of this model are significantly reduced, proving its effectiveness under complex data access patterns. This study not only verifies the potential of deep learning technology in storage system optimization, but also provides direction and reference for further optimizing and improving cache management strategies. This intelligent cache management strategy performs well in complex storage environments. By combining the spatial feature extraction capabilities of convolutional neural networks and the time series modeling capabilities of long short-term memory networks, the CNN-LSTM model can more accurately predict cache needs, thereby Dynamically optimize cache allocation to improve system response speed and resource utilization. This research provides theoretical support and practical reference for cache optimization under large-scale data access modes, and is of great significance to improving the performance of future storage systems.
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 | 0.000 | 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 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".