MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1963373258 · doi:10.1109/pacrim.2001.953651

Optimal wavelength allocation and flow assignment in multiwavelength optical networks

2001· article· en· W1963373258 on OpenAlexaff
O. Kabranov, Dimitrios Makrakis, Charalambos D. Charalambous, Dan Ionescu

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced Optical Network Technologies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceProfit maximizationComputer networkBandwidth allocationRouting and wavelength assignmentWavelengthProfit (economics)Distributed computingMathematical optimizationBandwidth (computing)Wavelength-division multiplexingMathematicsEconomicsPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Automatically switched optical networks (ASON) require a control strategy that determines the optimal distribution of flows over different wavelengths. Such a strategy will increase the profit, by allowing service providers to quickly and effectively define and deploy new service offers. We introduce a demand elasticity based model for wavelength and flow assignment in multiwavelength optical networks. The model captures the appropriate optical flow for every link and for every wavelength using price/demand elasticity. The model assumes that the physical and logical topology of the optical network, the maintenance cost, and the traffic demands are known parameters. Under these assumptions a mixed integer optimization is used for wavelength allocation and flow assignment of the requested traffic demand and surplus maximization for the transport service supplier, operating the optical network. A case study shows how the bandwidth demand affects the supplier's profit.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
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)0.0010.000

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.215
Teacher spread0.206 · 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
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations2
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAdvanced Optical Network TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207