Showing 1–2 of 2 results for author: Kuroda, T
-
CloudCAMP: Automating Cloud Services Deployment and Management
Authors:
Anirban Bhattacharjee,
Yogesh Barve,
Aniruddha Gokhale,
Takayuki Kuroda
Abstract:
Users of cloud platforms often must expend significant manual efforts in the deployment and orchestration of their services on cloud platforms due primarily to having to deal with the high variabilities in the configuration options for virtualized environment setup and meeting the software dependencies for each service. Despite the emergence of many DevOps cloud automation and orchestration tools,…
▽ More
Users of cloud platforms often must expend significant manual efforts in the deployment and orchestration of their services on cloud platforms due primarily to having to deal with the high variabilities in the configuration options for virtualized environment setup and meeting the software dependencies for each service. Despite the emergence of many DevOps cloud automation and orchestration tools, users must still rely on specifying low-level scripting details for service deployment and management using Infrastructure-as-Code (IAC). Using these tools required domain expertise along with a steep learning curve. To address these challenges in a tool-and-technology agnostic manner, which helps promote interoperability and portability of services hosted across cloud platforms, we present initial ideas on a GUI based cloud automation and orchestration framework called CloudCAMP. It incorporates domain-specific modeling so that the specifications and dependencies imposed by the cloud platform and application architecture can be specified at an intuitive, higher level of abstraction without the need for domain expertise using Model-Driven Engineering(MDE) paradigm. CloudCAMP transforms the partial specifications into deployable Infrastructure-as-Code (IAC) using the Transformational-Generative paradigm and by leveraging an extensible and reusable knowledge base. The auto-generated IAC can be handled by existing tools to provision the services components automatically. We validate our approach quantitatively by showing a comparative study of savings in manual and scripting efforts versus using CloudCAMP.
△ Less
Submitted 8 April, 2019; v1 submitted 3 April, 2019;
originally announced April 2019.
-
Computer-aided diagnosis of lung nodule using gradient tree boosting and Bayesian optimization
Authors:
Mizuho Nishio,
Mitsuo Nishizawa,
Osamu Sugiyama,
Ryosuke Kojima,
Masahiro Yakami,
Tomohiro Kuroda,
Kaori Togashi
Abstract:
We aimed to evaluate computer-aided diagnosis (CADx) system for lung nodule classification focusing on (i) usefulness of gradient tree boosting (XGBoost) and (ii) effectiveness of parameter optimization using Bayesian optimization (Tree Parzen Estimator, TPE) and random search. 99 lung nodules (62 lung cancers and 37 benign lung nodules) were included from public databases of CT images. A variant…
▽ More
We aimed to evaluate computer-aided diagnosis (CADx) system for lung nodule classification focusing on (i) usefulness of gradient tree boosting (XGBoost) and (ii) effectiveness of parameter optimization using Bayesian optimization (Tree Parzen Estimator, TPE) and random search. 99 lung nodules (62 lung cancers and 37 benign lung nodules) were included from public databases of CT images. A variant of local binary pattern was used for calculating feature vectors. Support vector machine (SVM) or XGBoost was trained using the feature vectors and their labels. TPE or random search was used for parameter optimization of SVM and XGBoost. Leave-one-out cross-validation was used for optimizing and evaluating the performance of our CADx system. Performance was evaluated using area under the curve (AUC) of receiver operating characteristic analysis. AUC was calculated 10 times, and its average was obtained. The best averaged AUC of SVM and XGBoost were 0.850 and 0.896, respectively; both were obtained using TPE. XGBoost was generally superior to SVM. Optimal parameters for achieving high AUC were obtained with fewer numbers of trials when using TPE, compared with random search. In conclusion, XGBoost was better than SVM for classifying lung nodules. TPE was more efficient than random search for parameter optimization.
△ Less
Submitted 28 August, 2017; v1 submitted 19 August, 2017;
originally announced August 2017.
