MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7000046967

An Efficient Computation of\nConvex Closure on Abstract Events

2006· dissertation· en· W7000046967 on OpenAlexfundno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueUWSpace (University of Waterloo) · 2006
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicSoftware System Performance and Reliability
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversity of WaterlooInternational Council for Canadian Studies
KeywordsEvent (particle physics)NucleofectionFilter (signal processing)Frame (networking)
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The behaviour of distributed applications can be modeled as the occurrence of events and how these events relate to each other. Event data collected according to this event model can be visualized using process-time diagrams that are constructed from a collection of traces and events. One of the main characteristics of a distributed system is the large number of events that are involved, especially in practical situations. This large number of events, and hence large process-time diagrams, make distributed-system observation difficult for the user. However, event-predicate detection, a search mechanism able to detect and locate arbitrary predicates within a process-time diagram or event collection, can help the user to make sense of this large amount of data. Ping Xie used the convex-abstract event concept, developed by Thomas Kunz, to search for hierarchical event predicates. However, his algorithm for computing convex closure to construct compound events, and especially hierarchical compound events (i. e. , compound events that contain other compound events), is inefficient. In one case it took, on average, close to four hours to search the collection of event data for a specific hierarchical event predicate. In another case, it took nearly one hour. This dissertation discusses an efficient algorithm, an extension of Ping Xie?s algorithm, that employs a caching scheme to build compound and hierarchical compound events based on matched sub-patterns. In both cases cited above, the new execution times were reduced by over 94%. They now take, on average, less than four minutes.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.859
Threshold uncertainty score0.995

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 science0.0010.000
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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.216
Teacher spread0.209 · 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 designObservational
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
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueUWSpace (University of Waterloo)Same topicSoftware System Performance and ReliabilityFrench-language works237,207