MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4410859297 · doi:10.3390/electronics14112214

A Systematic Review of Energy Efficiency Metrics for Optimizing Cloud Data Center Operations and Management

2025· review· en· W4410859297 on OpenAlexafffund
Ashkan Safari, Hoda Sorouri, Afshin Rahimi, Arman Oshnoei

Bibliographic record

VenueElectronics · 2025
Typereview
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicCloud Computing and Resource Management
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Windsor
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsCloud computingData centerCenter (category theory)Computer scienceSystematic reviewEnergy managementSystems engineeringOperations researchData scienceIndustrial engineeringOperations managementEngineering managementEngineeringEnergy (signal processing)StatisticsMathematicsOperating systemPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cloud Data Centers (CDCs) are an essential component of the infrastructure for powering the digital life of modern society, hosting and processing vast amounts of data and enabling services such as streaming, Artificial Intelligence (AI), and global connectivity. Given this importance, their energy efficiency is a top priority, as they consume significant amounts of electricity, contributing to operational costs and environmental impact. Efficient CDCs reduce energy waste, lower carbon footprints, and support sustainable growth in digital services. Consequently, energy efficiency metrics are used to measure how effectively a CDC utilizes energy for computing versus cooling and other overheads. These metrics are essential because they guide operators in optimizing resource use, reducing costs, and meeting regulatory and environmental goals. To this end, this paper reviews more than 25 energy efficiency metrics and more than 250 literature references to CDCs, different energy-consuming components, and configuration setups. Then, some real-world case studies of corporations that use these metrics are presented. Thereby, the challenges and limitations are investigated for each metric, and associated future research directions are provided. Prioritizing energy efficiency in CDCs, guided by these energy efficiency metrics, is essential for minimizing environmental impact, reducing costs, and ensuring sustainable scalability for the digital economy.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.017
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.023

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.017
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.003
Bibliometrics0.0100.011
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.302
Teacher spread0.274 · 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 designSystematic review
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

Citations19
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueElectronicsSame topicCloud Computing and Resource ManagementFrench-language works237,207