Proceedings of the 4th ACM/IEEE Symposium on Architectures for Networking and Communications Systems
Pourquoi ce travail est dans la base
Une base qui oublie comment elle a trouvé un travail ne peut pas être vérifiée. Voici les voies qui ont admis celui-ci.
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
On behalf of the program committee we are both pleased to welcome you to the fourth edition of the ACM/IEEE Symposium on Architectures for Networking and Communications Systems (ANCS) being held in San Jose, CA. ANCS has become one of the premier research conferences in networking, and is dedicated to the design of the hardware and software components used to create communication networks. This year, we continued the effort to maintain a high-quality program by addressing the most important research areas. The program includes several papers in areas such as multi-core processors and hardware implementations as they apply to network systems, while also addressing topics in switches, routers, packet classification and network I/O components. We were fortunate to have an outstanding program committee of 32 members who graciously contributed their time and expertise towards the success of the conference. Every one of them was dedicated and thoroughly reviewed the papers they were assigned, and we are sure the authors will be greatly helped by the feedback provided in the reviews. The quality of any conference is derived from the quality of the submitted papers and the quality of the paper selection process. This conference is indebted to all authors who submitted their best work and to the program committee made of experts in the field. We received 67 submissions from all over the world. About 60% of the submitted papers were from the U.S. and Canada, about 23% from Asia/Pacific, and about 17% from Europe, Middle East and Africa. Qualified papers received at least three reviews mostly from program committee members. The review process was "double-blind". Authors' identities were kept anonymous throughout the process. At the end the program committee accepted 17 papers which will be presented in a single track over the two days of the conference. We also chose seven papers from the submitted papers to be presented as posters, with an associated two page abstract that is included in the Proceedings. The program will also have two excellent Keynote Talks and a Panel. We hope that all of you will find the program enjoyable, stimulating and useful to your research, for this would be the best reward for all the work that went into its preparation.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,003 | 0,001 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle