MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1869545673 · doi:10.1109/nafips.2001.944685

Mapping the Internet

2002· article· en· W1869545673 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
FieldComputer Science
TopicWeb Data Mining and Analysis
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
Fundersnot available
KeywordstracerouteComputer scienceThe InternetCompleteness (order theory)Internet topologyNetwork mappingData miningNetwork topologyTask (project management)Theoretical computer scienceData scienceComputer networkWorld Wide WebMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Discovery of a network topology is a challenging task. Available algorithms that rely on simple hop-limited, traceroute-style probes give different performance in terms of the completeness (fuzziness) of the resulting map, the speed of mapping, and the efficiency of mapping. The authors provide a brief overview of the types of mapping abstractions that have been used and review available techniques for generating maps of the Internet's infrastructure. A small study conducted in order to compare two of these techniques is described. Results of this study indicate that informed random address probing offers more complete network maps quickly and more efficiently. They also suggest that probing from multiple sources and amalgamating the results may improve the completeness of maps.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.962
Threshold uncertainty score0.896

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 science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.001

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 head0.054
GPT teacher head0.219
Teacher spread0.165 · 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

Citations8
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicWeb Data Mining and AnalysisFrench-language works237,207