MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1619177340 · doi:10.1109/icc.2002.997365

End-to-end signaling and routing for optical IP networks

2003· article· en· W1619177340 on OpenAlexaff
M.J. Francisco, Lambros Pezoulas, Changcheng Huang, I. Larnbadaris

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced Optical Network Technologies
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer networkComputer scienceRouting protocolSignaling protocolDistributed computingEnhanced Interior Gateway Routing ProtocolRouting (electronic design automation)Dynamic Source RoutingQuality of service

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper outlines an approach, called the optical border gateway protocol (OBGP) of extending the BGP routing protocol to support light path setup and management across an optical network. OBGP is a distributed approach, which gives more control to the edge customer and allows customers to better manage their optical wavelengths. It provides an interdomain routing/signaling solution that integrates heterogeneous domains into an end-to-end optical network and can coexist with most of the existing intradomain solutions. OBGP has the capability of setting up light paths in both networks with wavelength converters as well as in networks without wavelength converters. By combining routing with signaling in OBGP, signaling functions can leverage some features of existing routing functions and thus provide a lightweight solution. The development of OBGP has been discussed by reviewing current BGP behavior and design requirements for OBGP. An implementation of OBGP using simulation tools has been presented, along with initial test results, which have shown that a seamless migration from BGP to OBGP is possible.

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)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.228
Teacher spread0.216 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations26
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAdvanced Optical Network TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207