MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1927555499 · doi:10.1109/tst.2015.7128934

On scaling software-Defined Networking in wide-area networks

2015· article· en· W1927555499 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

VenueTsinghua Science & Technology · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicSoftware-Defined Networks and 5G
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSoftware-defined networkingComputer scienceScalingSoftwareComputer networkOperating systemMathematicsGeometry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Software-Defined Networking (SDN) has emerged as a promising direction for next-generation network design. Due to its clean-slate and highly flexible design, it is believed to be the foundational principle for designing network architectures and improving their flexibility, resilience, reliability, and security. As the technology matures, research in both industry and academia has designed a considerable number of tools to scale software-defined networks, in preparation for the wide deployment in wide-area networks. In this paper, we survey the mechanisms that can be used to address the scalability issues in software-defined wide-area networks. Starting from a successful distributed system, the Domain Name System, we discuss the essential elements to make a large scale network infrastructure scalable. Then, the existing technologies proposed in the literature are reviewed in three categories: scaling out/up the data plane and scaling the control plane. We conclude with possible research directions towards scaling software-defined wide-area networks.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.847
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.011
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0040.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.253
Teacher spread0.227 · 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