MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7097230797

Failure-aware Lifespan Performance Analysis of Network Fabric in Modular Data Centers: Toward Deployment in Canada’s North

2016· article· en· W7097230797 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicCloud Computing and Resource Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsModular designNetwork topologySoftware deploymentData centerKey (lock)Function (biology)Topology (electrical circuits)Class (philosophy)
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Data centers have evolved from a passive element of compute infrastructure to become an active and core part of any ICT solution. Modular data centers are a promising design approach to improve resiliency of data centers, and they can play a key role in deploying ICT infrastructure in remote and inhospitable environments with low temperatures and hydro- and wind-electric capabilities. Modular data centers can also survive even with lack of continuous physical maintenance and support. Generally, the most critical part of a data center is its network fabric that could impede the whole system even if all other components are fully functional. In this work, a complete failure analysis of modular data centers using failure models of various components including servers, switches, and links is performed using a proposed Monte-Carlo approach. This approach allows us to calculate the performance of a design along its lifespan even at the terminal stages. A class of modified Tanh-Log cumulative distribution function of failure is proposed for aforementioned components in order to achieve a better fit on the real data. In this study, the real experimental data from the lanl05 database is used to calculate the fitting parameters of the failure cumulative distributions. For the network connectivity, various topologies, such as FatTree, BCube, MDCube, and their modified topologies are considered. The performance and also the lifespan of each topology in presence of failures in various components are studied against the topology parameters using the proposed approach. Furthermore, these topologies are compared against each other in a consistent settings in order to determine what topology could deliver a higher performance and resiliency subject to the scalability and agility requirements of a target data center design.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.847
Threshold uncertainty score0.305

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.210
Teacher spread0.189 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
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
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicCloud Computing and Resource ManagementFrench-language works237,207