MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1992010432 · doi:10.1109/honet.2010.5715768

Novel techniques for deploying monitoring trails (m-trails) for fault localization in all-optical networks

2010· article· en· W1992010432 on OpenAlexaff
Khaled Maamoun, Hussein T. Mouftah

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced Optical Network Technologies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceFault (geology)Dijkstra's algorithmProcess (computing)Travelling salesman problemTable (database)Real-time computingDistributed computingAlgorithmData miningShortest path problemTheoretical computer scienceGraph

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, desirable performance of fault localization process in all-optical networks is presented by employing the recently introduced Monitoring-Trail (m-trail) (that was proved to yield better performance by establishing monitoring resources in a shape of trails). As well, new techniques for deploying m-trails on networks along with its established lightpaths to perform fault localization are introduced. A novel technique based on Geographic Midpoint and the use of pair-wise shortest-paths that employ the standard Dijkstra algorithm, an adapted Chinese Postman's Problem (CPP) solution and adapted Traveling Salesman's Problem (TSP) solution algorithms. In addition, a manual exercise method can be directly applied to the ACT table. Different examples are given to illustrate these techniques with a brief description on its establishment algorithms. Using m-trails with established lightpaths to perform fault localization is a superb technique as it saves network resources; by reducing the number of the m-trails required for fault localization and hence the number of wavelengths used in the network.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.286
Teacher spread0.261 · 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 designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations6
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAdvanced Optical Network TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207