MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W56413504

Dynamic Aspect-Oriented Load Balancing in Java RMI.

2008· article· en· W56413504 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueParallel and Distributed Processing Techniques and Applications · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAdvanced Software Engineering Methodologies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceJavaLoad balancing (electrical power)Distributed computingRemote procedure callServerOperating systemOverhead (engineering)Distributed objectProcess (computing)Round-robin DNSCommon Object Request Broker ArchitectureThe InternetGrid
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Load balancing is the process of distributing client requests over a set of servers, and is a key element of obtaining good performance in a distributed application. Java RMI extends Java with distributed objects whose methods can be called from remote clients. In some Java RMI programs, there may be multiple replicas of a given object that can be the receiver of a remote method invocation. Effectively distributing these requests across these replicas requires either an extra balancer process or additional code on the client for this distribution. In this paper, we demonstrate the use of dynamic aspects in JAC to solve this problem. The client proxy is modified with an aspect to forward requests to a specific server, but the server is also able to shed load by altering or removing this aspect. The overhead of this approach is evaluated using a set of microbenchmarks.

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.

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: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.906
Threshold uncertainty score0.518

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.285
Teacher spread0.267 · 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