MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Memory failures in microservices based Cellular IoT systems - An experimental evaluation of service availability

2025· article· W7119025615 on OpenAlexaff
Hassaan Fahimuddin Siddiqui, Ferhat Khendek

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Language
FieldComputer Science
TopicSoftware System Performance and Reliability
Canadian institutionsConcordia UniversityEricsson (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMicroservicesScalabilityRobustness (evolution)High availabilityService (business)Internet of ThingsReliability (semiconductor)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Ensuring service availability for large-scale distributed systems, like IoT systems, has always been a challenge. Some IoT systems are safety-critical, a service outage could lead to severe damage or fatality, and therefore demand high-availability to ensure reliability and continuity of service. Microservice architecture combined with Kubernetes orchestrator have become a popular approach to achieve high-availability in such type of systems. However, while these architectures provide scalability and quick recoverability from many types of failures, their effectiveness is limited when addressing memory-related application failures. In this paper, we present an experimental evaluation of the service availability provided by microservice architectures deployed on Kubernetes in scenarios involving memory-related failures, through a case study on Tele-operated driving, which is a safety-critical cellular IoT use case. Our findings indicate that Kubernetes lacks robustness when confronted with memory-related faults, leading to extended recovery times and service disruptions. Therefore, advanced fault-tolerance mechanisms are required to better support high-availability requirements in safety-critical cellular IoT systems.

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)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.304
Teacher spread0.276 · 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 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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicSoftware System Performance and ReliabilityFrench-language works237,207