MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1499084309 · doi:10.1109/icppw.2004.59

Monitoring cycles for fault detection in meshed all-optical networks

2004· article· en· W1499084309 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicOptical Network Technologies
Canadian institutionsCommunications Research Centre CanadaCarleton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCardinality (data modeling)Computer scienceFault detection and isolationHeuristicFault (geology)Set (abstract data type)Mechanism (biology)Matching (statistics)Eulerian pathReal-time computingAlgorithmDistributed computingData miningArtificial intelligenceMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Fault detection is critical for all-optical networks (AONs). This paper introduces the concept of monitoring cycle and proposes a fault detection mechanism based on decomposing AONs into a set of cycles (a cycle cover), in which each one is defined as a monitoring cycle. Two cycle-finding algorithms are developed and compared for the proposed fault detection mechanism: heuristic depth first searching (HDFS) and shortest path Eulerian matching (SPEM). The degradation of wavelength utilization and the cardinality of cycle covers are analyzed for evaluating the proposed mechanism. The proposed mechanism is applied to four network examples: NSFNET, ARPA2, SmallNet and Bellcore. The evaluation results show that the proposed fault detection mechanism is effective and cost efficient.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.236
Threshold uncertainty score0.467

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.013
GPT teacher head0.241
Teacher spread0.228 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Quick stats

Citations13
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicOptical Network TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207