MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1523025400 · doi:10.1109/iscc.2004.1358418

On multicast traffic grooming in WDM networks

2004· article· en· W1523025400 on OpenAlexaff
Ahmad Nabil Mohd Khalil, Chadi Assi, A. Hadjiantonis, Georgios Ellinas, M.A. Ali

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced Optical Network Technologies
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMulticastTraffic groomingUnicastComputer networkComputer scienceProtocol Independent MulticastXcastDistance Vector Multicast Routing ProtocolMulticast addressBlocking (statistics)Distributed computingSource-specific multicastTree (set theory)Logical topologyRouting (electronic design automation)Network topologyWavelength-division multiplexingPragmatic General MulticastTopology (electrical circuits)Mathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We investigate the problem of grooming dynamic multicast traffic in WDM mesh networks. This problem is equivalent to designing a light-tree based logical topology for multicast streams. It consists of four subproblems, namely routing, wavelength assignment, design of a light-tree based logical topology, and traffic-grooming. We develop different routing schemes to efficiently groom low-speed connections on the light-tree based logical topology. Numerical results demonstrate that the proposed approaches use the network resources more efficiently compared to the nongrooming approach and the approach of serving the multicast requests as separate unicast requests. Moreover, amongst the proposed techniques, the logical-first multihop grooming scheme MC-MHl outperforms all other schemes in terms of blocking probability and performance gain.

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.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.210
Teacher spread0.203 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations27
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAdvanced Optical Network TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207