MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1908029608 · doi:10.1109/icupc.1998.733667

Scheduling and quality of service in the General Packet Radio Service

2002· article· en· W1908029608 on OpenAlex
J.H.M. Sau, C. Scholefield

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
TopicNetwork Traffic and Congestion Control
Canadian institutionsMotorola (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceFair-share schedulingComputer networkRound-robin schedulingScheduling (production processes)Dynamic priority schedulingQuality of serviceFixed-priority pre-emptive schedulingRate-monotonic schedulingEarliest deadline first schedulingGeneral Packet Radio ServiceDeadline-monotonic schedulingReal-time computingDistributed computingWirelessMathematical optimizationTelecommunicationsMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Scheduling is an important aspect in the support of QoS in GPRS. Scheduling in GPRS is different from scheduling in ATM due to the existence of the MAC protocol, multi-slot capability restriction, and difference in QoS requirements. Two scheduling algorithms, the static priority scheduling (SPS) and modified earliest deadline (MED), have been analyzed. Both scheduling algorithms allow GPRS to attain high channel utilization, with MED performing slightly better than SPS. Queue lengths and normalized frame scheduling advance are two possible congestion metrics available from the scheduler, with the latter being more versatile across a variety of traffic statistics and system bandwidth.

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)0.001
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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.977
Threshold uncertainty score0.201

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.050
GPT teacher head0.265
Teacher spread0.215 · 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

Citations15
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicNetwork Traffic and Congestion ControlFrench-language works237,207