MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7109234313 · doi:10.1145/3769790

Enjima: A Resource-Adaptive Stream Processing System

2025· article· en· W7109234313 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the ACM on Management of Data · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAdvanced Database Systems and Queries
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLatency (audio)Stream processingDataflowPipeline (software)WorkloadThroughputScheduling (production processes)Memory managementResponse time

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Effective system resource management is key to delivering high performance stream processing. Stream processing engines (SPEs) rely on their host operating system (OS) for managing compute and memory resources, but this is inefficient as the OS is not stream-aware, i.e., the OS does not understand the streaming dataflow or pipeline state in how they relate to the resource requirements of stream processing. Additionally, the lack of stream-awareness inhibits adaptive resource allocation in response to dynamic workload changes. We present Enjima, a modern SPE designed for scale-up on a single machine through adaptive stream-aware management of memory and compute resources. Enjima's eager, cache-aligned, block-based memory management avoids memory allocation on the critical path of system execution while providing efficient data transfer of events between streaming operators. Its variable batching forms event batches based on pending inputs and available output memory, reducing batching delays and memory accesses to enhance system performance. Enjima integrates a stream-aware, state-based operator scheduler that leverages fine-grained operator and pipeline metrics such as operator cost, selectivity, and latency gradient to optimize for both latency and throughput, enabling significant performance gains and rapid adaptation to dynamic workloads. Evaluation against state-of-the-art systems shows that Enjima achieves up to 6.3× higher throughput and up to three orders of magnitude lower latency through integrated stream-aware memory and CPU resource management.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.019

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.002

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 head0.040
GPT teacher head0.285
Teacher spread0.245 · 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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the ACM on Management of DataSame topicAdvanced Database Systems and QueriesFrench-language works237,207