MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4412764303 · doi:10.1002/nem.70020

QoS‐Aware Load Balancing in Cloud Computing Based on Chronological Kookaburra Optimization Algorithm

2025· article· en· W4412764303 on OpenAlexaff
K. Baskar, Peter Soosai Anandaraj A., P. S. Ramesh, Swedhaa Mathivanan

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Network Management · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicCloud Computing and Resource Management
Canadian institutionsArtificial Intelligence in Medicine (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceCloud computingLoad balancing (electrical power)Distributed computingQuality of serviceAlgorithmOptimization algorithmComputer networkMathematical optimizationOperating system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT In cloud computing environments, user requests often lead to varying load conditions across the system, resulting in underloaded, overloaded, or balanced states. Both underloading and overloading can cause system inefficiencies, including increased power consumption, prolonged execution times, and higher machine failure rates. Therefore, effective load balancing (LB) becomes a critical aspect of task scheduling in cloud systems, whether at the level of virtual machines (VMs) or independently. To address these challenges, this paper proposes the Chronological Kookaburra Optimization Algorithm (ChKOA) for efficient LB in cloud computing (CC). The proposed ChKOA is the combination of chronological concept with the Kookaburra Optimization Algorithm (KOA). Initially, tasks are assigned to VMs in a round‐robin manner. Based on specific VM parameters, the VMs are classified into overloaded and underloaded categories using deep embedded clustering (DEC). Tasks in overloaded VMs are prioritized and redistributed to underloaded VMs, considering factors such as supply, demand, capacity, predicted load, and key Quality of Service (QoS) metrics, including resource availability and reliability. Load prediction is performed using a Deep Residual Network (DRN). Simulation results demonstrate that the proposed ChKOA achieves a balanced load of 0.535, capacity utilization of 0.954, resource availability of 0.954, reliability of 0.936, and a computational cost of 0.327 s.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.817
Threshold uncertainty score0.631

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.248
Teacher spread0.241 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Network ManagementSame topicCloud Computing and Resource ManagementFrench-language works237,207