Find research datasets worth reusing
Search datasets from major research repositories and use ShareScore to quickly assess how well each record supports discovery, access, and reuse.
107
datasets available to search
ShareScore release 0.7.1
Dataset results
107 results for “Energy Consumption”
Energy Consumption Estimation of API-usage in Smartphone Apps via Static Analysis
<p>OPEN CALL FOR COLLECTING ENERGY PROFILES @ <a href="https://github.com/AbdulAli/replication-kit-msr-2023">https://github.com/AbdulAli/replication-kit-msr-2023</a></p> <p>Cite this work as:</p> <p>@inproceedings{bangash2023msr,<br> title={Energy Consumption Estimation of API-usage in Mobile Apps via Static Analysis},<br> author={Bangash, Abdul Ali and Jamal, Qasim and Eng, Kalvin and Ali, Karim and Hindle, Abram},<br> booktitle={2023 20th International Conference on Mining Software Repositories (MSR)},<br> pages={5721--5730},<br> year={2023},<br> organization={IEEE}<br> }</p> <p>This is the replication-kit of the paper published at MSR 2023.</p> <p>It includes:</p> <ul> <li>SQLite operations' benchmarks</li> <li>SQLite benchmarks' energy profiles</li> <li>The E-Factor Calculation program</li> </ul>
Grey model analysis of vehicle population, road transport energy consumption, and vehicular emissions
<p>The files provide additional information to the paper “Grey model analysis of vehicle population, road transport energy consumption, and vehicular emissions". The supporting data file contains excel sheets of data used in the analysis, and the supporting information file provides some assumptions, background information and other results not included in the paper</p>
Micro data from the 2012 Greek Household Energy Consumption survey
<p>The dataset is a cleaned and modified version of the microdata from the 2012 Greek Household Energy Consumption survey</p>
Projecting Residential Energy Consumption across Multiple Income Groups under Decarbonization Scenarios using GCAM-USA
<p>Understanding the residential energy consumption patterns across multiple income groups under decarbonization scenarios is crucial for designing equitable and effective energy policies that address climate change while minimizing disparities. This dataset is developed using an integrated human-Earth system model, supported by the Grid Operations, Decarbonization, Environmental and Energy Equity Platform (GODEEEP) Investment at Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (PNNL).</p> <p>GCAM-USA operates within the Global Change Analysis Model, which represents the behavior of, and interactions between, different sectors or systems, including the energy system, the economy, agriculture and land use, water, and the climate. GCAM is one of only a few integrated global human-Earth system models, also known as Integrated Assessment Models (IAMs), which address key processes in inter-linked human and earth systems and provide insights into future global environmental change under alternative scenarios (IAMC, 2022).</p> <p>GCAM has global coverage with varying spatial disaggregation depending on the type of system being modeled. For energy and economy systems, 32 regions across the globe, including the USA as its own region, are modeled in GCAM. GCAM-USA advances with greater spatial detail in the USA region, which includes 50 States plus the District of Columbia (hereinafter “state”). The core operating principle for GCAM and GCAM-USA is market equilibrium. The model solves every market simultaneously at each time step where supply equals demand and prices are endogenous in the model. The official documentation of GCAM and GCAM-USA can be found at: <a href="https://jgcri.github.io/gcam-doc/toc.html">https://jgcri.github.io/gcam-doc/toc.html</a></p> <p>The dataset included in this repository is based on an improved version of GCAM-USA v6, where multiple consumer groups, differentiated by the average income level for 10 population deciles, are represented in the residential building energy sector. As of May 15, 2023, the latest officially released version of GCAM-USA has a single consumer (represented by average GDP <em>per capita</em>) in the residential sector and thus does not include this feature. This multiple-consumer feature is important because (1) demand for residential floorspace and energy are non-linear in income, so modeling more income groups improves the representation of total demand and (2) this feature allows us to explore the distributional effects of policies on these different income groups and the resulting disparity across the groups in terms of residential energy security. If you need more information, please contact the corresponding author.</p> <p>Here, we ran GCAM-USA with the multiple-consumer feature described above under four scenarios over 2015-2045 (Table 1), including two business-as-usual scenarios and two decarbonization scenarios (with and without the impacts of climate change on heating and cooling demand). This repository contains the key output variables related to the residential building energy sector under the four scenarios, including:</p> <ul> <li>income shares by consumer groups at each state over 2015-2045 (Casper et al. 2022)</li> <li>residential energy consumption <em>per capita</em> by service and fuel, by state and income group, 2015-2045</li> <li>residential energy service output (energy consumption * technology efficiency) <em>per capita</em> by service, fuel, and technology, by state and income group, 2015-2045</li> <li>estimated energy burden (Eq.1), by state and income group, 2015-2045</li> <li>residential heating service inequality (Eq.2), by state, 2015-2045</li> </ul> <p> </p> <p><strong>Table 1</strong></p> <table> <thead> <tr> <th scope="col">Scenarios</th> <th scope="col">Policies</th> <th scope="col">Climate Change Impacts</th> </tr> </thead> <tbody> <tr> <td>BAU (Business-as-usual)</td> <td>Existing state-level energy and emission policies</td> <td>Constant HDD/CDD (heating degree days / cooling degree days)</td> </tr> <tr> <td>BAU_climate</td> <td>Existing state-level energy and emission policies</td> <td>Projected state-level HDD/CDD through 2100 under RCP8.5</td> </tr> <tr> <td>NZnoCCS (Net-Zero by 2050 without CCS)</td> <td> <p>Two national targets:</p> <ul> <li>50% net-GHG emission reduction relative to 2005 level and net-zero GHG emissions by 2050</li> <li>US power grid achieves clean-grid by 2035</li> </ul> </td> <td>Constant HDD/CDD</td> </tr> <tr> <td>NZnoCCS_climate</td> <td> <p>Two national targets:</p> <ul> <li>50% net-GHG emission reduction relative to 2005 level and net-zero GHG emissions by 2050</li> <li>US power grid achieves clean-grid by 2035</li> </ul> </td> <td>Projected state-level HDD/CDD through 2100 under RCP8.5</td> </tr> </tbody> </table> <p> </p> <p><strong>Eq. 1</strong></p> <p><span class="math-tex">\(Energy\ burden_i = \dfrac{\sum_j (service\ output_{i,j} * service\ cost_j)}{GDP_i}\)</span></p> <p>for income group<em> i</em> and service <em>j</em></p> <p> </p> <p><strong>Eq. 2</strong></p> <p><strong><span class="math-tex">\(Residential\ heating\ service\ inequality = \dfrac{S_{d10}}{(S_{d1} +S_{d2} + S_{d3} + S_{d4})}\)</span></strong></p> <p>where <em>S</em> is the residential heating service output <em>per capita</em> of the highest income group (<em>d10</em>) divided by the sum of that of the lowest four income groups (<em>d1</em>, <em>d2</em>, <em>d3</em>, and <em>d4</em>), similar to the Palma ratio often used for measuring income inequality. A higher Palma ratio indicates a greater degree of inequality.</p> <p> </p> <p><strong>Reference</strong></p> <p>Casper, Kelly, Narayan, Kanishka B., O'Neill, Brian C., & Waldhoff, Stephanie. 2022. State level income distributions for net income deciles for the US for historical years (2011-2014) and projections for different SSP scenarios (2015-2100) (latest version obtained from the authors on April 6, 2023) [Data set]. Zenodo. <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.7227128">https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.7227128</a></p> <p>IAMC. 2022. The common Integrated Assessment Model (IAM) documentation [Online]. Integrated Assessment Consortium. Available: https://www.iamcdocumentation.eu/index.php/IAMC_wiki [Accessed May 2023].</p> <p> </p> <p>This research was supported by the Grid Operations, Decarbonization, Environmental and Energy Equity Platform (GODEEEP) Investment, under the Laboratory Directed Research and Development (LDRD) Program at Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (PNNL).</p> <p>PNNL is a multi-program national laboratory operated for the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) by Battelle Memorial Institute under Contract No. DE-AC05-76RL01830.</p> <p> </p>
Accurately Measuring Energy Consumption of Large Cosmological Simulations
<p><a href="https://event.pasc23-conference.org/session/sess138">https://event.pasc23-conference.org/session/sess138</a></p> <p>Minisymposium</p> <p>MS6G - Green Computing Architectures and Tools for Scientific Computing</p>
Dataset of paper "Removal of diclofenac by UV-B and UV-C light-emitting diodes (LEDs) driven advanced oxidation processes (AOPs): Wavelength dependence, kinetic modelling and energy consumption"
<p>Dataset of paper "Removal of diclofenac by UV-B and UV-C light-emitting diodes (LEDs) driven advanced oxidation processes (AOPs): Wavelength dependence, kinetic modelling and energy consumption"</p> <ul> <li>Molar absorption coefficient of the DCF (pH 7.2), FC (pH 8.5), and H<sub>2</sub>O<sub>2</sub> (pH 6.5) in the wavelength range of 200-400 nm. </li> <li>Time-based and UV fluence-based kinetic constant and synergy factor for the DCF degradation.</li> <li>Diclofenac degradation fitted by the proposed models (UV/H<sub>2</sub>O<sub>2</sub> and UV/FC).</li> <li>Oxidant degradation fitted by the proposed models (UV/H<sub>2</sub>O<sub>2</sub> and UV/FC).</li> </ul>
Updated Projections of Residential Energy Consumption across Multiple Income Groups under Decarbonization Scenarios using GCAM-USA
<p>Understanding the residential energy consumption patterns across multiple income groups under decarbonization scenarios is crucial for designing equitable and effective energy policies that address climate change while minimizing disparities. This dataset is developed using an integrated human-Earth system model, supported by the Grid Operations, Decarbonization, Environmental and Energy Equity Platform (GODEEEP) Investment at Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (PNNL). Compared to the first version of the dataset (<a href="https://zenodo.org/record/79880387">https://zenodo.org/record/79880387</a>), this updated dataset is based on model runs where the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) are implemented in the model scenarios. In addition to the queried and post-processed key output variables related to residential energy sector in .csv tables, we also upload the full model output databases in this repository, so that users can query their desired model outputs.</p> <p>GCAM-USA operates within the Global Change Analysis Model (GCAM), which represents the behavior of, and interactions between, different sectors or systems, including the energy system, the economy, agriculture and land use, water, and the climate. GCAM is one of only a few integrated global human-Earth system models, also known as Integrated Assessment Models (IAMs), which address key processes in inter-linked human and earth systems and provide insights into future global environmental change under alternative scenarios (IAMC, 2022).</p> <p>GCAM has global coverage with varying spatial disaggregation depending on the type of system being modeled. For energy and economy systems, 32 regions across the globe, including the USA as its own region, are modeled in GCAM. GCAM-USA advances with greater spatial detail in the USA region, which includes 50 States plus the District of Columbia (hereinafter “state”). The core operating principle for GCAM and GCAM-USA is market equilibrium. The model solves every market simultaneously at each time step where supply equals demand and prices are endogenous in the model. The official documentation of GCAM and GCAM-USA can be found at: <a href="https://jgcri.github.io/gcam-doc/toc.html">https://jgcri.github.io/gcam-doc/toc.html</a>.</p> <p>The dataset included in this repository is based on an improved version of GCAM-USA v6, where multiple consumer groups, differentiated by the average income level for 10 population deciles, are represented in the residential building energy sector. As of September 24, 2023, the latest officially released version of GCAM-USA has a single consumer (represented by average GDP <em>per capita</em>) in the residential sector and thus does not include this feature. This multiple-consumer feature is important because (1) demand for residential floorspace and energy are non-linear in income, so modeling more income groups improves the representation of total demand and (2) this feature allows us to explore the distributional effects of policies on these different income groups and the resulting disparity across the groups in terms of residential energy security. If you need more information, please contact the corresponding author.</p> <p>Here, we ran GCAM-USA with the multiple-consumer feature described above under four scenarios over 2015-2050 (Table 1), including two business-as-usual scenarios and two decarbonization scenarios (with and without the impacts of climate change on heating and cooling demand). This repository contains the full model output databases and key output variables related to the residential energy sector under the four scenarios, including:</p> <ul> <li>income shares by consumer groups at each state over 2015-2050 (Casper et al., 2023)</li> <li>residential energy consumption <em>per capita</em> by service, fuel, state, and income group, 2015-2050</li> <li>residential energy service output (energy consumption * technology efficiency) <em>per capita </em>by service, fuel, state, and income group, 2015-2050</li> <li>estimated energy burden (Eq.1), by state and income group, 2015-2050</li> <li>estimated satiation gap (Eq.2), by service, state, and income group, 2015-2050</li> <li>residential heating service inequality (Eq.3), by state, 2015-2050</li> </ul> <p> </p> <p><strong>Table 1</strong></p> <table> <thead> <tr> <th scope="col">Scenarios</th> <th scope="col">Policies</th> <th scope="col">Climate Change Impacts</th> </tr> </thead> <tbody> <tr> <td>BAU (Business-as-usual)</td> <td>Existing state-level energy and emission policies (including IRA)</td> <td>Constant HDD/CDD (heating degree days / cooling degree days)</td> </tr> <tr> <td>BAU_climate</td> <td>Existing state-level energy and emission policies (including IRA)</td> <td>Projected state-level HDD/CDD through 2100 under RCP8.5</td> </tr> <tr> <td>NZ (Net-Zero by 2050)</td> <td> <p>In addition to BAU, two national targets:</p> <ul> <li>50% net-GHG emission reduction relative to 2005 level and net-zero GHG emissions by 2050</li> <li>US power grid achieves clean-grid by 2035</li> </ul> </td> <td>Constant HDD/CDD</td> </tr> <tr> <td>NZ_climate</td> <td> <p>In addition to BAU, two national targets:</p> <ul> <li>50% net-GHG emission reduction relative to 2005 level and net-zero GHG emissions by 2050</li> <li>US power grid achieves clean-grid by 2035</li> </ul> </td> <td>Projected state-level HDD/CDD through 2100 under RCP8.5</td> </tr> </tbody> </table> <p> </p> <p><strong>Eq. 1</strong></p> <p><span class="math-tex">\(Energy\ burden_{i,k} = \dfrac{\sum_j (service\ output_{i,j,k} * service\ cost_{j,k})}{GDP_{i,k}}\)</span></p> <p>for income group <em>i </em>and state <em>k</em>, that sums over all residential energy services <em>j</em>.</p> <p> </p> <p><strong>Eq. 2</strong></p> <p><span class="math-tex">\(Satiation\ Gap_{i,j,k} = \dfrac{satiation\ level_{j,k} - service\ output_{i,j,k}} {satiation\ level_{j,k}}\)</span></p> <p>for service <em>j</em>, income group <em>i</em>, and state <em>k</em>. Note that the satiation level and service output are per unit of floorspace.</p> <p> </p> <p><strong>Eq. 3</strong></p> <p><strong><span class="math-tex">\(Residential\ heating\ service\ inequality_j = \dfrac{S_j^{d10}}{(S_j^{d1} +S_j^{d2} + S_j^{d3} + S_j^{d4})}\)</span></strong></p> <p>for service <em>j </em>where <em>S</em> is the residential heating service output <em>per capita</em> of the highest income group (<em>d10</em>) divided by the sum of that of the lowest four income groups (<em>d1</em>, <em>d2</em>, <em>d3</em>, and <em>d4</em>), similar to the Palma ratio often used for measuring income inequality. A higher Palma ratio indicates a greater degree of inequality. Among the key output variables in this repository, we provide the residential <em>heating</em> service inequality output table as an example.</p> <p> </p> <p><strong>Reference</strong></p> <p>Casper, K. C., Narayan, K. B., O'Neill, B. C., Waldhoff, S. T., Zhang, Y., & Wejnert-Depue, C. (2023). Non-parametric projections of the net-income distribution for all U.S. states for the shared socioeconomic pathways. <em>Environmental Research Letters</em>. http://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1748-9326/acf9b8.</p> <p>IAMC. 2022. The common Integrated Assessment Model (IAM) documentation [Online]. Integrated Assessment Consortium. Available: https://www.iamcdocumentation.eu/index.php/IAMC_wiki [Accessed May 2023].</p> <p> </p> <p><strong>Acknowledgement</strong></p> <p>This research was supported by the Grid Operations, Decarbonization, Environmental and Energy Equity Platform (GODEEEP) Investment, under the Laboratory Directed Research and Development (LDRD) Program at Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (PNNL).</p> <p>PNNL is a multi-program national laboratory operated for the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) by Battelle Memorial Institute under Contract No. DE-AC05-76RL01830.</p>
2025 Competition on Electric Energy Consumption Forecast Adopting Multi-criteria Performance Metrics
<p> </p> <p>This dataset is the second release of data for the <a href="https://www.gecad.isep.ipp.pt/ERM-competitions/2025-energy-forecast/">2025 Competition on Electric Energy Consumption Forecast Adopting Multi-criteria Performance Metrics</a></p> <p>The competition is open and welcomes everyone who wishes to participate and to anyone who can benefit from these data.</p> <h2>Competition Outline</h2> <p>Forecasting of electric energy consumption can be a very difficult tasks when handling building-level data. However, an accurate forecast is needed to boost the potential of energy management systems. The need to forecast energy consumption grows as our reliance on renewable energy sources, such as solar and wind power, grows. This means that to meet consumer demand with renewable energy generation, energy management systems must operate based on accurate energy forecasting models for both short and long-term periods. Energy consumption forecasting techniques that can manage a variety of scenarios, including varying prediction timeframes, accessible data, data frequency, and even data quality, have been the subject of intense research. There is no one-size-fits-all approach, where certain situations call for different approaches. The goal of this competition is to compile and evaluate the most recent advances in energy consumption forecasting techniques.</p> <p> </p> <h2>Releases Details</h2> <ul> <li><strong>v1.0</strong>: one year of data from a smart building with readings taken every 5 minutes.</li> <li><strong>v2.0</strong>: 40 days of data from a smart building with readings taken every 5 minutes.</li> <li><strong>v3.x</strong>: a single day of data from a smart building with readings taken every hour. These releases will become available during the first competition period (from 06/01/2025 to 10/01/2025).</li> <li><strong>v4.x</strong>: a single day of data from a smart building with readings taken every hour. These releases will become available during the second competition period (from 14/07/2025 to 18/07/2025).</li> </ul> <p> </p> <h2>Dataset Description</h2> <p>All releases are composed of the following data:</p> <ul> <li>Time: in hours and minutes</li> <li>Power: in Watts</li> <li>Voltage: in Volts</li> <li>Current: in Ampers</li> <li>Generation power: in Watts</li> <li>Temperature: in ºC</li> </ul>
Conservation energetics of beluga whales: Rates of energy consumption during submerged swimming in beluga whales
Open the record for dataset details and reuse information.
Tour de France data for the improvement of energy consumption in devices powered by limited energy sources
<p>We propose a set of data that were collected as part of a "tour de France" with electrical wheelchair.</p> <p>Part of these data are allowed to propose a mathematical model based on an experimental methodology on the energy consumed in smartphones.</p> <p>The objective is to make accessible the data related to the publications in several fields of research (computer science, telecommunication, meteorological science, artificial intelligence, statistics ...)</p>
Energy consumption and greenhouse gas emissions data of activated carbon production using different biomass
<p>This dataset includes the energy consumption and Greenhouse Gas emissions data of activated carbon production using 73 different types of woody biomass.</p> <p>Understanding the environmental implications of activated carbon (AC) produced from diverse biomass feedstocks is critical for biomass screening and process optimization for sustainability. Many studies have developed Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) for biomass-derived AC. However, most of them either focused on individual biomass species with differing process conditions or compared multiple biomass feedstocks without investigating the impacts of feedstocks and process variations. Developing LCA for AC from diverse biomass is time-consuming and challenging due to the lack of process data (e.g., energy and mass balance).</p> <p>This study addresses these knowledge gaps by developing a modeling framework that integrates artificial neural network (ANN), a machine learning approach, and kinetic-based process simulation. The integrated framework is able to generate Life Cycle Inventory data of AC produced from 73 different types of woody biomass with 250 characterization data samples. The results show large variations in energy consumption and GHG emissions across different biomass species (43.4–277 MJ/kg AC and 3.96–22.0 kg CO<sub>2</sub>-eq/kg AC). The sensitivity analysis indicates that biomass composition (e.g., hydrogen and oxygen content) and process operational conditions (e.g., activation temperature) have large impacts on energy consumption and GHG emissions associated with AC production.</p>
Miscellaneous Electric Loads: Dataset of Unit Energy Consumption
<p>Spreadsheet dataset of unit energy consumption of 36 residential and commercial miscellaneous electric loads (MELs), with forecasts out to 2030. This is an update from version 1.0.0 (published September 2019) that contains two key changes:</p> <ol> <li>A calculation error on the annual energy consumption for residential security systems has been updated.</li> <li>Residential laptop computers are now explicitly analyzed and have a dedicated tab in the spreadsheet.</li> </ol> <p>Sources for all data are provided in the first tab (called "Legend and Sources").</p>
Energy consumption and renewable generation data of 5 aggregators - 15 minute resolution (13 bus grid)
<p>Type: Energy consumption and renewable generation data</p> <p>Period of data collection: 19-03-2019 to 25-03-2019 (15-minute 672 periods)</p> <p>Resolution: 15 minutes</p> <p>Network: 13-bus MV grid</p> <p>Aggregator list:</p> <ul> <li>Aggregator 1: Shopping Mall; Hospital; Fire Station</li> <li>Aggregator 2: 15 houses</li> <li>Aggregator 3: 7 Office buildings</li> <li>Aggregator 4: Wind, PV</li> <li>Aggregator 5: Slow and fast-charging stations of electric vehicles</li> </ul> <p>Further data:</p> <ul> <li>Market prices 2019 summer and winter</li> <li>Wind generation curve</li> </ul> <p>Data obtained from CENERGETIC project (<a href="http://www.gecad.isep.ipp.pt/CENERGETIC/">http://www.gecad.isep.ipp.pt/CENERGETIC/</a>)</p> <p>National Funds through the FCT—Portuguese Foundation for Science and Technology, under Project PTDC/EEI-EEE/28983/2017 (CENERGETIC), CEECIND/02814/2017, UIDB/00760/2020.</p>
About prediction of vehicle energy consumption for eco-routing: simulation results
<p>Supplementary materials, experiment results, processing scripts</p>
Artifact for A Survey on Techniques to Profile the Energy Consumption of Android Applications
<p>To ensure availability and reproducibility, we have made all study artifacts publicly available for "<strong>A Survey on Techniques to Profile the Energy Consumption of Android Applications</strong>", a paper submitted to <strong><em>ACM Computing Surveys</em></strong>. In this study, we review state-of-the-art software-based energy profilers tailored for Android applications and propose a novel taxonomy for comparative analysis. We provide a brief overview of these energy profilers and compare their features. Based on the conducted literature review, we present conceptual architectures of the different types of software-based energy profilers to help build a tool that addresses the existing limitations in energy profiling.</p> <p>This repository contains the following files:</p> <ul> <li>Coding list generated from the Nvivo project (Files compared by number of codes). This file contains the codes used in taxonomy and the number of code references.</li> <li>Coding hierarchy generated from the Nvivo project (Codes compared by number of coding references). This file shows the hierarchy of codes and their share visually.</li> <li>List of selected papers (generated from the Nvivo project). This file presents the list of selected papers and metadata about these papers including publishing year, publisher, type of publication, etc.</li> <li>Search queries (SearchQueries). This file contains the search queries that are used to obtain the publications for review.</li> <li>Summary of the papers generated from the Nvivo project (Summary). This file contains the summary of the papers.</li> </ul>
Understanding the Energy Consumption of Cloud-native Software Systems
<p>These artifacts contain the dataset generated in the paper "Understanding the Energy Consumption of Cloud-native Software Systems". The dataset contains resource utilisation, power consumption, estimated power consumption and load metrics for a cloud-native software system. The test setup is consists of 6 machines running an OpenStack cluster. This OpenStack cluster is running 12 virtual machines that are in turn hosting a Kubernetes cluster. Performance and (estimated) power consumption are measured on all levels of the system.</p> <p>The Bare-Metal (BM) and Virtual Machines (VM) are identified by their IP addresses. For BM the IP mapping is as follows:</p> <ul> <li>192.168.1.109 - i3-04</li> <li>192.168.1.110 - i3-02</li> <li>192.168.1.111 - i5-02</li> <li>192.168.1.112 - i3-01</li> <li>192.168.1.113 - i5-01</li> <li>192.168.1.114 - i5-04</li> </ul> <p>For VM the IP mapping is:</p> <ul> <li>192.168.1.190 - kubernetes-agent-7</li> <li>192.168.1.191 - kubernetes-agent-6</li> <li>192.168.1.192 - kubernetes-agent-10</li> <li>192.168.1.194 - kubernetes-master</li> <li>192.168.1.196 - kubernetes-agent-3</li> <li>192.168.1.197 - kubernetes-agent-1</li> <li>192.168.1.198 - kubernetes-agent-2</li> <li>192.168.1.201 - kubernetes-agent-4</li> <li>192.168.1.203 - kubernetes-agent-9</li> <li>192.168.1.204 - kubernetes-agent-5</li> <li>192.168.1.207 - kubernetes-agent-8</li> <li>192.168.1.209 - kubernetes-agent-11</li> </ul> <p>The VMs are deployed on the BMs as follows:</p> <ul> <li>i3-01 <ul> <li>kubernetes-agent-2</li> <li>kubernetes-agent-8</li> </ul> </li> <li>i3-02 <ul> <li>kubernetes-agent-1</li> <li>kubernetes-agent-6</li> </ul> </li> <li>i3-04 <ul> <li>kubernetes-agent-10</li> <li>kubernetes-agent-11</li> </ul> </li> <li>i5-01 <ul> <li>kubernetes-agent-3</li> <li>kubernetes-agent-5</li> </ul> </li> <li>i5-02 <ul> <li>kubernetes-master</li> <li>kubernetes-agent-7</li> </ul> </li> <li>i5-04 <ul> <li>kubernetes-agent-4</li> <li>kubernetes-agent-9</li> </ul> </li> </ul> <p>Note that the following BMs are excluded from the experiments as they have other roles in the cluster and do not run workloads:</p> <ul> <li>i3-03 (Juju - deploying OpenStack on BM nodes)</li> <li>i3-05 (ProxMox - external observability tools that do not run in the cluster)</li> <li>i5-03 (MAAS - provisioning of BM nodes)</li> </ul> <h1>Data Sets</h1> <p>The artifacts consists of 3 separate data sets: <code>constant</code>, <code>direct</code> and <code>linear</code>, corresponding to the respective load profile applied to the SUT as discussed in the paper. Each data set contains the same metrics, but the system is put under a different load.</p> <p>Every experiment is repeated 3 times. All 3 repetitions are included in the data set. The data is collected using Prometheus and stored in JSON files.</p> <p>For the <code>constant</code> and <code>linear</code> data sets, load is applied by deploying the "OpenTelemetry demo application", and sending automated user requests to the application. For the <code>direct</code> dataset, this application is not used and instead Kubernetes pods are created that apply a constant load to the cluster.</p> <p>The timestamps of the experiments are as follows:</p> <table> <tbody> <tr> <th>Run</th> <th>Iteration</th> <th>Start</th> <th>End</th> </tr> </tbody> <tbody> <tr> <td>Constant - 0 users</td> <td>1</td> <td>02-05-2024 10:08</td> <td>02-05-2024 10:52</td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> <td>2</td> <td>06-05-2024 13:20</td> <td>06-05-2024 13:58</td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> <td>3</td> <td>07-05-2024 09:20</td> <td>07-05-2024 09:54</td> </tr> <tr> <td>Constant - 50 users</td> <td>1</td> <td>02-05-2024 13:26</td> <td>02-05-2024 13:57</td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> <td>2</td> <td>15-05-2024 14:06</td> <td>15-05-2024 14:38</td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> <td>3</td> <td>07-05-2024 09:56</td> <td>07-05-2024 10:39</td> </tr> <tr> <td>Constant - 100 users</td> <td>1</td> <td>02-05-2024 14:00</td> <td>02-05-2024 14:40</td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> <td>2</td> <td>06-05-2024 14:40</td> <td>06-05-2024 15:30</td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> <td>3</td> <td>07-05-2024 10:42</td> <td>07-05-2024 11:33</td> </tr> <tr> <td>Constant - 200 users</td> <td>1</td> <td>16-05-2024 09:37</td> <td>16-05-2024 10:09</td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> <td>2</td> <td>06-05-2024 15:32</td> <td>06-05-2024 16:13</td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> <td>3</td> <td>07-05-2024 11:34</td> <td>07-05-2024 12:11</td> </tr> <tr> <td>Constant - 400 users</td> <td>1</td> <td>02-05-2024 15:24</td> <td>02-05-2024 15:55</td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> <td>2</td> <td>06-05-2024 16:14</td> <td>06-05-2024 16:49</td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> <td>3</td> <td>07-05-2024 12:13</td> <td>07-05-2024 13:08</td> </tr> <tr> <td>Linear</td> <td>1</td> <td>22-05-2024 15:13</td> <td>22-05-2024 15:56</td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> <td>2</td> <td>22-05-2024 16:05</td> <td>22-05-2024 16:48</td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> <td>3</td> <td>23-05-2024 09:58</td> <td>23-05-2024 10:41</td> </tr> <tr> <td>Direct</td> <td>1</td> <td>2024-05-23 13:01:28</td> <td>2024-05-23 14:00:05</td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> <td>2</td> <td>2024-05-23 14:33:23</td> <td>2024-05-23 15:32:01</td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> <td>3</td> <td>2024-05-23 15:39:36</td> <td>2024-05-23 16:38:12</td> </tr> </tbody> </table> <p>A complete log of the experiments can be found in <code>experiments_log.txt</code>.</p> <h2>Constant</h2> <p>The constant data set contains the metrics for the system under a constant load. The load is generated by a Locust script that sends requests to the system. Data collection starts 1 minute after the desired number of concurrent users is reached and requests have stabilised. This experiment is performed for the following constant number of concurrent users:</p> <ul> <li>0 users</li> <li>50 users</li> <li>100 users</li> <li>200 users</li> <li>400 users</li> </ul> <p>Note that the <code>0 users</code> data does not contain the <code>report_*.html</code> and <code>request_*.csv</code> files, as these are generated by Locust and Locust is not run for the <code>0 users</code> scenario.</p> <p>Furthermore, note that Horizontal Pod Autoscaling is <em>not</em> enabled for this data set.</p> <h2>Linear</h2> <p>The linear dataset contains the metrics for the system under a linearly scaling load. The load is generated through Locust. It starts at 0 users, and scales up to 100 users at a rate of 1 user per 20 seconds. After the load reaches 100 users, another 10 minutes of data is recorded. Every dataset is 45 minutes long, with 1.7 minutes of no load, 33.3 minutes of scaling up, and 10 minutes of max load.</p> <p>Note that Horizontal Pod Autoscaling <em>is</em> enabled for this data set.</p> <h2>Direct</h2> <p>The direct data set compliments the linear dataset. While the linear dataset provides a realistic load with things like networking factors being taken into account, the linear dataset can bottleneck on things like networking and the request client, so CPU usage is not maxed out. The direct dataset scales up linearly by applying direct CPU load to the Kubernetes pods without any application simulating a real usecase. The dataset works by deploying Kubernetes pods that max out immediately on exactly 200mCPU of load. The experiment starts with 1 pod, and 2 pods are added every 90 seconds up till 77 pods (the maximum number of pods the cluster allows to be scheduled). The first 1.5 minutes is no load, then 57 minutes to scale up, and then another 1.5 minutes at max load.</p> <p>Note that the <code>direct</code> data set does not contain the <code>app_*.json</code> files, as this data set does not deploy an application and therefore no application specific metrics are collected. Instead, a <code>script_log.txt</code> is provided that explains when and how the direct load was scaled up.</p> <h1>Files</h1> <p>A table for each file in the data set can be found below, including the unit of the metric and a description of what data is collected in that file. The format of all JSON files is the API response format used by Prometheus. More information on this topic can be found here: <a title="https://prometheus.io/docs/prometheus/latest/querying/api/" href="https://prometheus.io/docs/prometheus/latest/querying/api/">https://prometheus.io/docs/prometheus/latest/querying/api/</a>. All timestamps are in the CEST timezone.</p> <table> <tbody> <tr> <th>Filename</th> <th>Unit</th> <th>Description</th> </tr> </tbody> <tbody> <tr> <td>app_ads_ad_requests_total.json</td> <td>Total Count</td> <td>Total requests received by the ad microservice</td> </tr> <tr> <td>app_currency_counter_total.json</td> <td>Total Count</td> <td>Total currency that circulated through the system</td> </tr> <tr> <td>app_frontend_requests_total.json</td> <td>Total Count</td> <td>Total requests received by the frontend service</td> </tr> <tr> <td>app_payment_transactions_total.json</td> <td>Total Count</td> <td>Total transactions made to the transaction microservice</td> </tr> <tr> <td>app_recommendations_counter_total.json</td> <td>Total Count</td> <td>Total recommendations made by the recommendation microservice</td> </tr> <tr> <td>container_blkio_device_usage_total.json</td> <td>Total Bytes</td> <td>Total bytes used by blkio devices for pods</td> </tr> <tr> <td>container_cpu_usage_seconds_total.json</td> <td>Total Seconds</td> <td>Cumulative cpu time consumed by the pod</td> </tr> <tr> <td>container_cpu_user_seconds_total.json</td> <td>Total Seconds</td> <td>Cumulative user cpu time consumed by the pod</td> </tr> <tr> <td>container_fs_reads_bytes_total.json</td> <td>Total Bytes</td> <td>Cumulative count of bytes read by the pod</td> </tr> <tr> <td>container_fs_writes_bytes_total.json</td> <td>Total Bytes</td> <td>Cumulative count of bytes written by the pod</td> </tr> <tr> <td>container_memory_rss.json</td> <td>Bytes</td> <td>Resident Set Size of the pod</td> </tr> <tr> <td>kepler_container_bpf_cpu_time_ms_total.json</td> <td>Milliseconds</td> <td>CPU time for the pod as measured through a Kepler BPF program</td> </tr> <tr> <td>kepler_container_core_joules_total.json</td> <td>Total Joules</td> <td>Total energy consumption of CPU cores used by a pod</td> </tr> <tr> <td>kepler_container_dram_joules_total.json</td> <td>Total Joules</td> <td>Total energy consumption of DRAM used by a pod</td> </tr> <tr> <td>kepler_container_joules_total.json</td> <td>Total Joules</td> <td>Aggregated total energy consumption of a pod</td> </tr> <tr> <td>kepler_container_package_joules_total.json</td> <td>Total Joules</td> <td>Cumulative energy consumed by all cores and uncore components of a pod</td> </tr> <tr> <td>kepler_node_core_joules_total.json</td> <td>Total Joules</td> <td>Aggregation of core_joules of all pods running on a Kubernetes node</td> </tr> <tr> <td>kepler_node_dram_joules_total.json</td> <td>Total Joules</td> <td>Aggregation of dram_joules of all pods running on a Kubernetes node</td> </tr> <tr> <td>kepler_node_package_joules_total.json</td> <td>Total Joules</td> <td>Aggregation of package_joules of all pods running on a Kubernetes node</td> </tr> <tr> <td>node_cpu_scaling_frequency_hertz.json</td> <td>Hertz</td> <td>Current scaled cpu thread frequency of a machine (BM or VM)</td> </tr> <tr> <td>node_cpu_seconds_total.json</td> <td>Total Seconds</td> <td>Total number of seconds the CPU worked on a machine (BM or VM)</td> </tr> <tr> <td>node_disk_read_time_seconds_total.json</td> <td>Total Seconds</td> <td>Total number of seconds spent reading disk on a machine (BM or VM)</td> </tr> <tr> <td>node_disk_write_time_seconds_total.json</td> <td>Total Seconds</td> <td>Total number of seconds spent writing disk on a machine (BM or VM)</td> </tr> <tr> <td>node_hwmon_temp_celsius.json</td> <td>Celsius</td> <td>Temperature of the machine (BM) as reported by its monitoring hardware</td> </tr> <tr> <td>node_load1.json</td> <td>Load Average</td> <td>Load on the machine (BM or VM) averaged over 1 minute</td> </tr> <tr> <td>node_load5.json</td> <td>Load Average</td> <td>Load on the machine (BM or VM) averaged over 5 minutes</td> </tr> <tr> <td>node_load15.json</td> <td>Load Average</td> <td>Load on the machine (BM or VM) averaged over 15 minutes</td> </tr> <tr> <td>node_memory_Active_bytes.json</td> <td>Bytes</td> <td>Active number of bytes in memory on the machine (BM or VM)</td> </tr> <tr> <td>node_memory_Committed_AS_bytes.json</td> <td>Bytes</td> <td>Committed number of bytes in memory on the machine (BM or VM)</td> </tr> <tr> <td>node_rapl_core_joules_total.json</td> <td>Total Joules</td> <td>Total energy consumption of CPU cores by a machine, estimated by RAPL</td> </tr> <tr> <td>node_rapl_dram_joules_total.json</td> <td>Total Joules</td> <td>Total energy consumption of DRAM by a machine, estimated by RAPL</td> </tr> <tr> <td>node_rapl_package_joules_total.json</td> <td>Total Joules</td> <td>Total energy consumption of the machine package, estimated by RAPL</td> </tr> <tr> <td>node_rapl_psys_joules_total.json</td> <td>Total Joules</td> <td>Total energy consumption of the machine psys, estimated by RAPL</td> </tr> <tr> <td>power_consumption.json</td> <td>Watt</td> <td>Energy consumption as measured by the physical power plugs</td> </tr> <tr> <td>report_*.html</td> <td>-</td> <td>HTML report describing details of locust actions during the experiment</td> </tr> <tr> <td>requests_*.csv</td> <td>-</td> <td>Request summary per endpoint generated by locust</td> </tr> <tr> <td>scaph_host_power_microwatts.json</td> <td>Microwatt</td> <td>Power consumption of the whole machine as estimated by Scaphandre</td> </tr> <tr> <td>scaph_process_cpu_usage_percentage.json</td> <td>Percentage</td> <td>Per-process CPU usage as a percentage of total machine CPU</td> </tr> <tr> <td>scaph_process_memory_bytes.json</td> <td>Bytes</td> <td>Per-process memory usage</td> </tr> <tr> <td>scaph_process_power_consumption_microwatts.json</td> <td>Microwatt</td> <td>Per-process energy consumption as estimated by Scaphandre</td> </tr> <tr> <td>script.log</td> <td>-</td> <td>Log for the direct experiments for scaling up the pods</td> </tr> </tbody> </table> <h1>Scripts</h1> <div> <div>All scripts used to query this data from the prometheus endpoint and to generate the results in the associated paper are included in the scripts directory. To run a script, the script must be placed in the same directory as the data it is operated on (e.g. /scripts/constant/power_estimation.ipynb has to be in /constant).</div> </div>
Energy Consumption of IoT Monitoring Software Architectures in the Edge
<p>Data repository with the raw and synthesized data of the paper published in the ECSA 2024 "<strong>Energy Consumption of IoT Monitoring Software Architectures in the Edge</strong>"</p> <p>This repository presents the experimental results of an exploratory study that measures the energy consumption of four Edge software architecture configurations of an indoor environmental monitoring IoT system. This dataset provides the raw measurements, the data analysis and the results comparison of the four architectures.<br>This repository is composed of five folders. Their content is explainded following:<br>- AdditionalMetrics: It includes the raw data obtained from the 24 experiments that are not used for calculating the energy consumption but it was provided by the measurement tools.<br>- BasalEnergyConsumption: It includes the raw data of the experiments launched to measure the basal consumption of the Smart Gateway. In addition, the excel file with the calculation of the Basal Energy Consumption is also provided.<br>- DataSynthesis: The data analysis and synthesis from the results of energy consumption are included in this folder. <br>- EnergyMeasurementExperiments: It includes the raw energy consumption data obtained from the 24 experiments.<br>- Figures: It includes the figures generated from the data obtained.</p>
Energy consumption performance of a VTOL UAV in and out of ground effect by flight test
<p>Video 1 shows the flight status of the tri tilt-rotor UAV Egretta30 in ground effect, mainly in the span-dominated ground effect region. Video 2 demonstrates a flow visualization experiment to observe the variations in wingtip vortices at different heights above the ground.</p>
On Reducing the Energy Consumption of Software Product Lines
<p>This dataset contains the results and the tools to reproduce experiments related to the paper On Reducing the Energy Consumption of Software Product Lines.</p>
Micro data from the Greek Household Budget Survey on energy consumption
<p>The dataset is the end product of compiling a number of datasets from the Greek Household Budget Survey, covering 13 years between 2004 and 2020. The variables included are basic socio-economic, demographic and housing characteristics, along with quantity and cost data of household energy sources.</p>
ScienceDex guides
Understand access before you commit
These curated guides explain access requirements, typical timelines, costs, and reuse considerations for widely used research datasets.
Allen Brain Atlas
Allen Brain Atlas is an Allen Institute collection of brain map atlases, datasets, APIs, and analysis tools covering mouse, human, and non-human primate brain resources.
Annotated Behaviour and Observability Dataset (ABODe)
ABODe is a University of Edinburgh DataShare dataset for behavior classification in group-housed mice using home-cage video, identities, bounding boxes, ground-plate positions, and annotator labels.
DANDI Archive for NWB datasets
DANDI is a BRAIN Initiative archive for publishing and sharing neurophysiology data, including electrophysiology, optophysiology, and behavioral data packaged as NWB and related standards.
International Brain Laboratory public data
The International Brain Laboratory public data releases expose standardized mouse decision-making experiments, including Neuropixels recordings, widefield calcium imaging, behavior, and session metadata accessed through the ONE API.
OpenNeuro
OpenNeuro is a free, open platform for sharing neuroimaging datasets, with public search, dataset pages, and download paths for web, S3, DataLad, and the OpenNeuro CLI.