A design and implementation of active network socket programming
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The concept of programmable nodes and active networks introduces programmability into communication networks. Code and data can be sent and modified on their routes to the destinations. Various research groups have designed and implemented their own design platforms. Each design has its own benefits and drawbacks. Moreover, there exists an interoperability problem among platforms. As a result, we introduce a concept that is similar to network socket programming. We intentionally establish a set of simple interfaces for programming active applications. This set of interfaces, known as active network socket programming (ANSP), will be working on top of all other execution environments in the future. Therefore, the ANSP offers a concept that is similar to "write once, run everywhere". It is an open programming model that active applications can work on all execution environments. It solves the heterogeneity within active networks. This is especially useful when active applications need to access all regions within a heterogeneous network to deploy a special service at critical points or to monitor the performance of the entire networks. Instead of introducing a new platform, our approach provides a thin, transparent layer on top of existing environments that can be easily installed for all active applications.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".