diff options
Diffstat (limited to 'main.tex')
| -rw-r--r-- | main.tex | 35 |
1 files changed, 9 insertions, 26 deletions
@@ -59,7 +59,7 @@ \begin{tcolorbox}[title=Results] The literature on DCDTs is scarce. Some systems barely classify as DTs (\emph{e.g.,} Kalibre~\cite{DBLP:conf/sensys/WangZD0TCWZ20}, ChatTwin~\cite{DBLP:conf/sensys/LiW0Z0T23}). - Existing deployments specialize in \textcolor{Red}{Cooling and Heat Modelling}, together with \textcolor{Red}{3D visualizations}. + Existing deployments specialize in \textcolor{Red}{Cooling and Heat Modelling}, together with \textcolor{Red}{3D visualizations}. Most lack crucial predictive DC behaviour modelling. \end{tcolorbox} \input{images/table.tex} @@ -71,9 +71,8 @@ \begin{frame}\frametitle{\textbf{RQ1}: Literature Review II} % Mandatory: split the figure into 2: top and bottom, and that way you can fill in the entire slide nicely. - \begin{tcolorbox}[title=A generic system model] - - This is a dummy sentence meant to make the tcolorbox have more than 2 lines of text width so that I am able to show the text and the table spacing better. + \begin{tcolorbox}[title=A holistic DCDT system model] + We propose a generic model of datacenter digital twinning that can be mapped to each system from \textbf{Table 1.1}. To answer \textbf{RQ2}, we design a ref. arch. for \emph{Operations Model}. \end{tcolorbox} \begin{center} \includegraphics[width=0.8\textwidth]{images/system_model2.pdf} @@ -93,6 +92,12 @@ \begin{frame}\frametitle{\textbf{RQ2}: Reference Architecture} \begin{minipage}[b]{0.45\linewidth} + \begin{tcolorbox}[title=Use cases] + + \end{tcolorbox} + \vspace{1cm} + \end{minipage} + \begin{minipage}[b]{0.45\linewidth} \begin{center} \includegraphics[width=1.25\textwidth]{images/ref_architecture.pdf} \end{center} @@ -100,32 +105,10 @@ \tiny \textbf{Figure 1.4:} The predictive datacenter digital twin architecture. The time-series data flows initially to the \texttt{Kibana} dashboard, \texttt{PostgreSQL} database and \texttt{Redis} cache, as suggested in~\cite{DBLP:conf/sc/TaheriBPRHDEWPM24}. \end{minipage} - \hfill % We decided to use discrete-event simulation, as opposed to computational fluid dynamics because of the high overheads of development time needed for CFD. % CFD simply takes too long to run, making it unfeasible for real-time analytics and simulation. % Citing ExaDigit: [CFD] they are also more computationally expensive, generally making real-time operation unfeasible. % Consider adding this minipage directly to the ``draw.io'' diagram - \begin{minipage}[b]{0.42\linewidth} - \begin{tcolorbox}[title=Functional Req.] - \scriptsize - \textbf{FR1:} The system shall be able to - - \textbf{FR2:} The system should be able to - - \textbf{FR3:} The system needs to do this and that - \end{tcolorbox} - - \begin{tcolorbox}[title=Non-functional Req.] - \scriptsize - \textbf{NFR1:} The system shall be able to - - \textbf{NFR2:} The system should be able to - - \textbf{NFR3:} The system needs to do this and that - - \end{tcolorbox} - \vspace{1cm} - \end{minipage} \end{frame} \begin{frame}\frametitle{\textbf{RQ3}: Experimental Results I} |