Performance evaluation of a new fairness control scheme for ring networks with spatial reuse
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We consider a ring in which simultaneous transmission of messages by different stations is allowed, a property referred to as spatial reuse. A ring network with spatial reuse can achieve a network level throughput much higher than the channel rate. A widely used scheme to achieve spatial reuse is Buffer Insertion Ring (BIR). However, because non-preemptive priority is given to the ring traffic, BIR scheme can lead to fairness problems in distributing the ring bandwidth among distinct nodes. In this paper, we propose a novel approach that provides fair access to all nodes and features low complexity. Within each node, the proposed approach allocates a separate queue for every upstream node. Each queue receives its fair share of the ring bandwidth based on an assigned weight value. Performance of the proposed scheme in terms of fairness and average packet delay has been evaluated through both simulations and analysis. The results show that the new scheme called <i>Source-Based Queuing</i> (SBQ) can provide fairness with less end-to-end delay compare to the BIR scheme.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".