MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1726294545

Network tomography by Non Negative Matrix Factorization (NNMF)

2010· article· en· W1726294545 on OpenAlexaff
Muhammad Hassan Raza, Bill Robertson, William Phillips, Jacek Ilow

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Symposium on Performance Evaluation of Computer and Telecommunication Systems · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicBlind Source Separation Techniques
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNetwork tomographyComputer scienceMatrix decompositionAlgorithmTomographyRouting (electronic design automation)Matrix (chemical analysis)Mathematical optimizationInferenceMathematicsArtificial intelligence
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper presents the application of a matrix based technique to eliminate the assumption of a known routing matrix in network tomography. Network tomography is an effective means of determining network performance parameters such as delay and packet loss rate (PLR). It gives indirect inference of network characteristics using active probes or passive monitoring of packets. Most of the network tomography research unrealistically assumes that the routing matrix is known and models network tomography as an inverse problem. This motivates us to look for more appropriate methods for the inverse problem solution where the routing matrix is accommodated by the statistical ability of such methods as Non Negative Matrix Factorization (NNMF). NNMF is used to factorize a matrix into two factors (matrices). The whole process involves matrices and optimizing the residue (difference between the initial value and the current value of a cost function) to obtain the best result. We have applied NNMF to the data obtained from a laboratory test bed to perform delay tomography under various traffic conditions. The simulation results verify that NNMF performs network tomography accurately without a priori knowledge of the routing matrix.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
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)0.0020.001

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.294
Teacher spread0.278 · 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
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

Citations3
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Symposium on Performance Evaluation of Computer and Telecommunication SystemsSame topicBlind Source Separation TechniquesFrench-language works237,207