The Journal of Supercomputing

, Volume 72, Issue 5, pp 1694–1714 | Cite as

Relative weight comparison between virtual key factors of cloud computing with analytic network process

  • Cheol-Rim Choi
  • Hwa-Young Jeong
  • Jong Hyuk Park
  • Haeng Jin Jang
  • Young-Sik Jeong


Drastical increase of a variety of information devices with networks are based on a rapid development and expansion of network infrastructures and technology. Cloud computing is a main technology which makes the information devices lighter and allows users to access their data and applications through a variety of networks. Under the circumstances that the importance and use of cloud computing system is rapidly increasing the virtualization technology becomes one of the key components consisting the cloud computing. Therefore, a quality of a variety of cloud computing systems is affected by the virtualization quality. Many factors which decide the virtualization quality and characteristics have been studied. However, when we apply the cloud computing system to our organization the priorities of the key factors should be decided and according to the priorities resourves must be alloted. In this paper, we suggested a relative weight evaluation process applying Analytic Network Process to analyze the interrelations between the key factors and calculate the relative weights of the factors. Especially, through the demonstration we showed that the interrelations between the factors affect the relative weights at large. With the proposed method we can find hidden priority and allot our resources and efforts more effectively.


Cloud computing Virtualization Quality Analytic Network Process Relative weight 



This Research has been performed as a subproject of project Global Science experimental Data hub Center (GSDC) and supported by the Korea Institute of Science and Technology Information (KISTI).


  1. 1.
    Sean M, Li Z, Bandyopadhyay S, Zhang J, Ghalsasi A (2011) Cloud computing - the business perspective. Decis Support Syst 51(1):176–189CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Hussain R, Oh H (2014) Cooperation-aware VANET clouds: providing secure cloud services to vehicular ad hoc networks. J Inf Process Syst 10(1):103–118CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Li S-H, Yen DC, Huc C-C, Lu W-H, Chiu Y-C (2012) Identifying critical factors for corporate implementing virtualization technology. Comput Hum Behav 28:2244–2257CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Weng MM, Shis TK, Hung JC (2013) A personal tutoring mechanism based on the cloud environment. J Converg 4(2):37–44Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Xie X, Jiang H, Jin H, Cao W, Yuan P, Yang L (2012) Metis: a profiling toolkit based on the virtualization of hardware performance counters. Hum-centric Comput Inf Sci 2(8):1–15Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Global Industry Analysts, Inc. (2010) Virtualization software. In: A global strategic business report.
  7. 7.
    DeLone WH, McLean ER (2003) The DeLone and McLean model of information systems success: a ten-year update. J Manag Inf Syst 19(3):9–30Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Saaty TL (2001) Decision making with dependence feedback: the analytic network process. RWS Publications, PittsburghGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Joshi G-JA, HssanTakabi JBD (2010) Security and privacy challenges in cloud computing environments. Secur Priv IEEE 8(6):24–31CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Goscinski A, Brock M (2010) Toward dynamic and attribute based publication, discovery and selection for cloud computing. Futur Gener Comput Syst 26(7):947–970CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Subashini S, Kavitha V (2011) A survey on security issues in service delivery models of cloud computing. J Netw Comput Appl 34(1):1–11CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Ramgovind S, Eloff MM, Smith E (2010) The management of security in cloud computing, Information security for South Africa (ISSA), IEEE, pp 1–7Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    A Platform Computing Whitepaper (2010) Enterprise Cloud Computing: Transforming IT, Platform Computing, pp 6, viewed 13 March 2010Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Dooley B (2010) Architectural Requirements Of The Hybrid Cloud. In: Information Management Online. viewed 10 February 2010
  15. 15.
    Global Netoptex Incorporated (2009) Demystifying the cloud. Important opportunities, crucial choices,, pp 4–14. viewed 13 December 2009
  16. 16.
    Lofstrand M (2009) The VeriScale Architecture. In: Elasticity and Efficiency for Private Clouds, Sun Microsystems, Sun Blue Print, Online, Part No 821–0248-11, Revision 1.1, 09/22/09Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Gong C, Liu J, Zhang Q, Chen H and Gong Z (2010) The Characteristics of Cloud Computing. In: 39th International Conference on Parallel Processing Workshops, pp 275–279Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Popek GJ, Goldberg RP (1974) Formal requirements for virtualizable third generation architectures. Commun ACM 17(7):412–421MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Fichera R (2002) The future of the data center–Modularity and virtualization. Forrester ResearchGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Singh A (2004) An introduction to virtualization.
  21. 21.
    Waters JK (2007) Virtualization definition and solutions.
  22. 22.
    Tulloch M (2010) Understanding Microsoft virtualization solutions. Microsoft Press, A Division of Microsoft CorporationGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
  24. 24.
    Smith JE, Nair R (2005) The architecture of virtual machines. Comput 38(5):32–38CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Uhlig R, Neiger G, Rodgers D, Santoni AL, Martins FCM, Anderson AV et al (2005) Intel virtualization technology. Comput 38(5):48–56CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Seetharaman S, Murthy K (2006) Test optimization using software virtualization. Softw IEEE 23(5):66–69CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Menasce DA, Bennani MN (2006) Autonomic virtualized environments. In: International conference on autonomic and autonomous systems, p 28Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Sotomayor B, Keahey K, Foster I (2006) Overhead matters. A model for virtual resource management. In: The 2nd international workshop on virtualization technology in distributed computing, pp 5–12Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Jung YW, Kim JM, Bae SJ, Koh KW, Woo YC, Kim SW (2009) Standard-based virtual infrastructure resource management for distributed and heterogeneous servers. In: The 11th international conference on advanced communication technology, pp 2233–2237Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Chen Q, Xin R (2005) Optimizing enterprise IT infrastructure through virtual server consolidation. In: Proceedings of the 2005 informing science and IT education joint conferenceGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Oguchi Y, Yamamoto T (2008) Server virtualization technology and its latest trends. Fujitsu Sci Tech J 44(1):46–52Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Sehgal NK, Ganguli M (2006) Applications of virtualization for server management and security. In: IEEE international conference on industrial technology, pp 2752–2755Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Tsai CF (2007) Comparisons of benchmark of virtualization technologies. Masterthesis. Tamkang University, TaiwanGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Symantec (2009) White paper: The green data center–A Symantec green IT guide, Symantec Corporation World HeadquartersGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Weltzin C, Delgado S (2009) Using virtualization to reduce the cost of test. In: Autotestcon, pp 439–442, IEEEGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    VMware (2006) White paper: Virtualization overview, VMware, Inc.Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Hsieh YF (2008) Virtualization of enterprise testing lab via VMware: a case study ona large software development company. Master thesis. National Taiwan University, TaiwanGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Saaty TL (1980) The Analytic hierarchy process. McGraw-Hill, New YorkzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Saaty TL (2008) Decision making with the analytic hierarchy process. Int J Serv Sci 1(1):83–98MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Meade LM, Sarkis J (1999) Analyzing organizational project alternatives for agile manufacturing process. Anal Netw Approach Int J Prod Res 37:241–261CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Bard JF, Sousk SF (1990) A tradeoff analysis for rough terrain cargo handlers using the AHP: an example of group decision-making. IEEE Trans Eng Manag 37(2):222–228CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Raisinghani MS, Meade L, Schkade LL (2007) Strategic e-Business decision analysis using the analytic network process. IEEE Trans Eng Manag 54(3):673–686CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Tang X, Feng J (2006) ANP theory and application expectation. Stat Decis-mak 12(2):138–140Google Scholar
  44. 44.
    Tzeng GH, Yu R (2006) A soft computing method for multi-criteria decision making with dependence and feedback. Appl Math Comput 180(6):63–75MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Yuksel I, Dagcarondeviren M (2007) Using the analytic network process (ANP) in a SWOT analysis - a case study for a textile firm. Inf Sci 177:3364–3382CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Chang CW, Wu CR, Lin CT, Lin HL (2007) Evaluating digital video recorder systems using analytic hierarchy and analytic network processes. Inf Sci 177(16):3383–3396CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Jung U, Seo DW (2010) An ANP approach for R&D project evaluation based on interdependencies between research objectives and evaluation criteria. Decis Support Syst 49(2):335–342CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Aragonés-Beltrán P, Pastor-Ferrando JP, Rodríguez-Pozo F, Chaparro-Gonzalez F (2010) An ANP-based approach for the selection of photovoltaic solar power plant investment projects. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 14(1):249–264CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Humanitas College, Kyung Hee UniversitySeoulKorea
  2. 2.Department of Computer Science and EngineeringSeoul National University of Science and TechnologySeoulKorea
  3. 3.Global Science experimental Data Hub CenterKorea Institute of Science and Technology InformationDaejeonKorea
  4. 4.Department of Multimedia EngineeringDongguk University100-715Korea

Personalised recommendations