MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4414882690 · doi:10.1051/epjconf/202533701065

An Implementation of Cloud-based Grid CE and SE For ATLAS and Belle II

2025· article· en· W4414882690 on OpenAlexaff
Jonathan Woithe, M. E. Sevior, P. Jackson, D. Dossett, M. Ebert

Bibliographic record

VenueEPJ Web of Conferences · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicDistributed and Parallel Computing Systems
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Victoria
Fundersnot available
KeywordsProvisioningGridInterfacingCloud computingVirtual machineSoftware deploymentGrid computingServerVirtualization

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The economies of scale realised by institutional and commercial cloud providers make such resources increasingly attractive for grid computing. We describe an implementation of this approach which has been deployed for Australia’s ATLAS and Belle II grid sites. The sites are built entirely with virtual machines (VM) orchestrated by an Open- Stack instance. The storage element (SE) utilises an XRootD-S3 gateway with back-end storage provided through an S3-compatible object store from a commercial provider. The provisioning arrangements required the deployment of some site-specific helper modules to ensure all SE interfacing requirements could be met. OpenStack hosts the XRootD redirector and proxy servers in separate VMs. The compute element (CE) comprises virtual machines (VM) within the Open-Stack instance. Jobs are submitted and managed by HTCondor. A CloudScheduler instance is used to coordinate the number of active OpenStack VMs and ensure that VMs run only when there are jobs to run. Automated configuration of the individual VMs associated with the grid sites is managed using Ansible. This approach was chosen due to its low overheads and the simplicity of deployment. Performance metrics of the resulting grid sites are presented to illustrate the viability of this cost-effective approach to resource provisioning for grid computing.

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)0.000
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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.706
Threshold uncertainty score0.251

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.313
Teacher spread0.292 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEPJ Web of ConferencesSame topicDistributed and Parallel Computing SystemsFrench-language works237,207