You are presented with multiple paper abstracts, alongside the associated literature review and chapter titles. Given the provided information, you are going to do a literature review. Please generate a coherent literature review that synthesizes the content, draws connections between different works, highlights major findings, and identifies any gaps in the existing research.

Literature Review Title: Auto-Scaling Web Applications in Clouds: A Taxonomy and Survey 
Chapter Title:  Prediction Horizon and Control. 
1. Abstract of Cited Paper (BIB001):  Large-scale online service providers have been increasingly relying on geographically distributed cloud infrastructures for service hosting and delivery. In this context, a key challenge faced by service providers is to determine the locations where service applications should be placed such that the hosting cost is minimized while key performance requirements (e.g., response time) are ensured. Furthermore, the dynamic nature of both demand pattern and infrastructure cost favors a dynamic solution to this problem. Currently most of the existing solutions for service placement have either ignored dynamics, or provided solutions inadequate to achieve this objective. In this paper, we present a framework for dynamic service placement problems based on control- and game-theoretic models. In particular, we present a solution that optimizes the hosting cost dynamically over time according to both demand and resource price fluctuations. We further consider the case where multiple service providers compete for resources in a dynamic manner. This paper extends our previous work [1] by analyzing the outcome of the competition in terms of both price of stability and price of anarchy. Our analysis suggests that in an uncoordinated scenario where service providers behave in a selfish manner, the resulting Nash equilibrium can be arbitrarily worse than the optimal centralized solution in terms of social welfare. Based on this observation, we present a coordination mechanism that can be employed by the infrastructure provider to maximize the social welfare of the system. Finally, we demonstrate the effectiveness of our solutions using realistic simulations. 
2. Abstract of Cited Paper (BIB002):  This paper presents a model and an algorithm for optimal service placement (OSP) of a set of N-tier software systems, subject to dynamic changes in the workload, Service Level Agreements (SLA), and administrator preferences. The objective function models the resources' cost, the service level agreements and the trashing cost. The optimization algorithm is predictive: its allocation or reallocation decisions are based not only on the current metrics but also on predicted evolution of the system. The solution of the optimization, in each step, is a set some service replicas to be added or removed from the available hosts. These deployment changes are optimal with regards to overall objectives defined over time. In addition, the optimization considers the restrictions imposed on the number of possible service migrations at each time interval. We present experimental results that show the effectiveness of our approach.

Literature Review:
Typically, a prediction algorithm loops in a specified interval to predict the average or maximum workloads arriving at the application during each of the next few intervals, which form the prediction horizon. It determines how far in the future the auto-scaler aims to predict. There are two approaches in which auto-scalers can apply prediction results in resource provisioning. The first way, which is adopted by the majority of works, takes the prediction horizon as the control interval and scales the application only based on the predicted workload of the next horizon. The other strategy is called Model Predictive Control (MPC). It sets the control interval the same as the prediction interval. When making decisions, it considers all the intervals within the horizon and determines the scaling operations at each interval using optimization. However, when executing the scaling operations, it only performs the action for the next interval and discards operations for the other intervals in the horizon. This method mitigates the problem of provisioning for short-term benefits, but it requires solving complex optimization models and, thus, consumes much more computing power. Ghanbari et al. BIB003 BIB001 and Zhang et al. BIB002 employed this approach. To tune the length of the horizon, users can adjust the duration of either each interval or number of intervals in the horizon. The size of the interval is critical to prediction precision. A large interval can significantly degrade the prediction accuracy and is useless for real-time control if the interval is greater than the control interval of the auto-scaler. The number of intervals in the horizon is also a crucial parameter, especially for the MPC approach. A balanced number should be chosen for the auto-scaler to reach good performance. If it is too small, MPC cannot fully realize its potential to make decisions for the long-term benefit. A large number, on the other hand, may mislead the auto-scaler as predictions for the intervals far in the future become increasingly inaccurate.