Accurate job runtime prediction can improve scheduling-aware resource management in grid and distributed computing environments, but prediction models must be evaluated under realistic deployment constraints. This paper revisits CPU burst time prediction on the GWA-T-4 AuverGrid workload trace and reformulates it as leakage-safe pre-execution job runtime prediction. We define the target as job-level runtime, use only submission-time attributes, exclude post-execution variables, and evaluate models under temporal and cold-start settings rather than relying only on random cross-validation. We compare standard regressors, chronological historical baselines, categorical encoding strategies, and CatBoost with native categorical handling. We further add temporal hyperparameter tuning, runtime predictability analysis, feature ablation, error analysis by job length, and a minimal scheduling simulation. After temporal-validation tuning, CatBoost achieves the strongest deployment-oriented result with R^2=0.239, MAE=27,019, RMSE=46,587, and LogMAE=2.646 on the held-out temporal test set. A single-server simulation over all 69,523 held-out temporal test jobs shows that prediction-informed SJF reduces average waiting time by 50.92% relative to FCFS. The results show that random-split evaluation overestimates performance, categorical-native boosting improves temporal generalization, and long-job underestimation remains a scheduler-relevant challenge.
Figures & tables
Statistic
Raw Trace
Final Dataset
Jobs
404,176
347,611
Columns
29
18
Temporal training jobs
–
278,088
Temporal test jobs
–
69,523
TABLE I: Dataset statistics before and after filtering.
Attribute
Category
Use
SubmitTime
Pre-submit metadata
Used
SubmitTime-derived features
Temporal metadata
Used
ReqNProcs
Pre-submit request
Used
ReqTime
Pre-submit request
Used
ReqMemory
Pre-submit request
Used
UserID
Pre-submit identifier
Used with training-only encoding
TABLE II: Leakage-safe feature policy for runtime prediction.
Statistic
Value
Jobs with positive runtime
339,314
Mean runtime
25,802
Median runtime
2,658
Runtime standard deviation
41,083
Maximum runtime
1,575,814
95th percentile
97,796
TABLE III: Runtime distribution and predictability analysis. Entropy is estimated on log(1+RunTime) .
Model
R2
MAE
RMSE
LogMAE
CatBoost
0.239
27,019
46,587
2.646
TABLE IV: Tuned CatBoost performance on the temporal 80/20 split.
Setting
Best Model
R2
MAE
RMSE
LogMAE
Leakage-safe random 5-fold
K-NN
0.700
7,417
22,332
0.679
Temporal 80/20, conventional models
Linear Regression
0.085
33,589
51,095
2.777
Temporal 80/20, native categorical
CatBoost
0.239
27,019
46,587
2.646
User cold-start
Gradient Boosting
0.133
23,747
36,988
3.425
Executable cold-start
K-NN
0.207
17,680
38,072
2.126
TABLE V: Best results across evaluation settings. Random splitting is optimistic; temporal and cold-start splits better reflect deployment.
Split
Baseline
R2
MAE
RMSE
LogMAE
Random 80/20
Global Median
-0.311
24,828
46,820
3.111
Random 80/20
User Median
0.131
18,391
38,105
1.851
Random 80/20
Group Median
-0.177
23,489
44,360
2.651
Random 80/20
Executable Median
-0.315
24,778
46,881
3.091
Random 80/20
User EMA
0.638
8,847
24,587
0.949
Random 80/20
Executable EMA
0.305
17,412
34,092
2.061
TABLE VI: Chronological-safe historical baselines. For each test job, entity history uses only training jobs submitted earlier than the test job.
Model
Encoding
R2
MAE
RMSE
LogMAE
Linear Regression
One-hot
-0.171
43,524
57,797
3.141
Random Forest
One-hot
-0.005
29,184
53,536
2.479
Gradient Boosting
One-hot
0.062
30,131
51,723
2.675
XGBoost
One-hot
-0.023
31,191
54,016
2.563
Linear Regression
Ordinal
-0.122
45,237
56,573
3.254
Random Forest
Ordinal
-0.051
33,478
54,759
2.709
TABLE VII: Temporal 80/20 performance under categorical encoding strategies. CatBoost uses native categorical handling and temporal-validation-selected hyperparameters.
Feature Group
R2
MAE
RMSE
LogMAE
All features
0.239
27,019
46,587
2.646
Identifiers + requested resources
0.129
29,149
49,850
2.401
Identifiers only
0.126
29,293
49,945
2.333
Raw submit-time only
-0.009
35,068
53,667
3.000
Cyclic submit-time only
-0.027
36,710
54,129
3.033
Requested resources only
-0.031
33,454
54,232
2.926
TABLE VIII: CatBoost feature ablation on the temporal 80/20 split.
TABLE XII: Minimal single-server scheduling simulation on all 69,523 held-out temporal test jobs. Predicted SJF uses tuned CatBoost runtime estimates. Oracle SJF uses true runtimes and serves only as an upper bound.