MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W67336036

Network latency impact on performance of software deployed across multiple clouds

2013· article· en· W67336036 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

VenueConference of the Centre for Advanced Studies on Collaborative Research · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicCloud Computing and Resource Management
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCloud computingComputer scienceSoftware deploymentLatency (audio)Enhanced Data Rates for GSM EvolutionComputer networkNetwork performanceServerCore networkDistributed computingQueueing theoryEdge computingEdge deviceResponse timeSoftwareOperating systemTelecommunications
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In computing, an cloud may be introduced close to some of the end users, to give faster service for very demanding applications. The transactions that require heavy processing capacity and longer processing times are seen as more suitable to be carried out at the cloud. Parts in the core and edge may then have to communicate, introducing associated network latencies. An application should be deployed across edge and core with the aim to reduce the overall effect of network latencies, in order to meet end user response time goals. In this paper, we use a Layered Queueing Network performance model to explore the impact of network latency and some possible deployment choices on the responsiveness of an application called HCAT (Home Care Aides Technology). The evaluations show that the use of the edge may cause performance degradation, rather than gain, for some kinds of applications.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.156
Threshold uncertainty score0.619

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
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 head0.071
GPT teacher head0.371
Teacher spread0.300 · 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