About the Influence of Workflow Topology on Task Intensity Prediction through Graph Learning
cs.DC, cs.LG
Submitted: 2026-09-30
Updated: 2026-09-30
Comments: Published at the IEEE 26th International Symposium on Cluster, Cloud and Internet Computing Workshops (CCGridW)
Journal ref: Otto, Max, et al. "About the Influence of Workflow Topology on Task Intensity Prediction Through Graph Learning." 2026 IEEE 26th International Symposium on Cluster, Cloud and Internet Computing Workshops (CCGridW). IEEE, 2026
DOI: 10.1109/CCGridW69005.2026.00044
License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
The gist: Efficient resource provisioning for large-scale workflows on cloud infrastructures is a critical performance engineering challenge.
Abstract
Efficient resource provisioning for large-scale workflows on cloud infrastructures is a critical performance engineering challenge. These workflows are often structured as directed acyclic graphs (DAGs), where under-provisioning can cause critical bottlenecks and over-provisioning leads to unnecessary costs. Accurate, task-level prediction of resource intensity (e.g., CPU load and memory usage) is essential for mitigating these issues. While task-level features are commonly used for prediction, the performance impact of the workflow's overall topological structure is often overlooked or assumed. The central question of our work is: To what extent does what part of the DAG topology influence task-level resource intensity, and what is the most effective way to model this influence? This paper presents a comprehensive benchmark to systematically quantify the impact of graph topology on task intensity prediction. We evaluate and compare a spectrum of modeling approaches. Our findings demonstrate that topology is a critical feature for accurate prediction. Models incorporating important topological information, even through simple handcrafted features, significantly outperform baseline models. We show that graph-native models provide the highest accuracy, achieving low mean absolute errors for both CPU and memory predictions, and can still be combined with simple topological features that they do not learn for better performance.
Sources
Related papers
- iScheduler: Reinforcement Learning-Driven Continual Optimization for Large-Scale Resource Investment Problems
- SAMM: Sharded Automated Market Maker
- InferScale: GPU-Native KV Injection for Personalized LLM Serving
- Vigil: Accountable Liveness against Selective Silence
- Steelhead: Interleaving Partially Synchronous and Asynchronous Commit Rules on a Shared DAG
- Democratizing MoE inference on commodity GPUs with CoMoE