MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1926121256 · doi:10.1109/icc.1989.49832

Dynamic link bandwidth allocation in an integrated services network

2003· article· en· W1926121256 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
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicAdvanced Queuing Theory Analysis
Canadian institutionsInstitut National de la Recherche Scientifique
Fundersnot available
KeywordsReservationBandwidth (computing)Computer scienceComputer networkCall blockingDynamic bandwidth allocationService (business)RevenueBandwidth allocationQuality of serviceBlocking (statistics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The link bandwidth allocation problem in an integrated services network, where the types of calls are differentiated by the rates at which the requests for service are generated, the mean holding time, and the number of trunks requested, is considered. The decision to accept or reject a call for service may be based on the number of different calls in service to maximise (or minimize) a certain performance measure. This can be the throughput, the maximum blocking probability of any call type, or the revenue when different types have different call charging rates. An efficient and accurate approximation for an integrated services system where a dynamic trunk reservation policy is used is presented. The advantage of the dynamic trunk reservation over the steady trunk reservation is shown by numerical results.< <ETX xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">&gt;</ETX>

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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.360
Threshold uncertainty score0.538

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.229
Teacher spread0.222 · 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

Citations10
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAdvanced Queuing Theory AnalysisFrench-language works237,207