MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1998182736 · doi:10.1109/icc.2010.5501843

Hybrid Techniques for Large-Scale IP Traffic Matrix Estimation

2010· article· en· W1998182736 on OpenAlexaff
Titus Olufemi Adelani, Attahiru Sule Alfa

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSparse and Compressive Sensing Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceInternet traffic engineeringTraffic generation modelNetwork traffic simulationInternet trafficNetwork tomographyOverhead (engineering)The InternetMatrix (chemical analysis)Data miningTraffic engineeringReal-time computingAlgorithmComputer networkNetwork traffic controlNetwork packetNetwork topology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The information on the volume of traffic flowing between all possible origin and destination pairs in an Internet Protocol (IP) network during a given period of time is generally referred to as traffic matrix (TM). This information, which is very important for various traffic engineering tasks, is very costly and difficult to obtain on large operational IP network, consequently, it is often inferred from readily available link load measurements. Several techniques have been proposed for estimation of traffic matrix on operational IP network from measured link load data and routing information. However, because the problem is a linear ill-posed and has no unique or direct solution, mathematically speaking, many of these techniques rely on some assumptions about the distribution of origin-destination (OD) flows. The validity of these assumptions and resulting prior estimates affect the performance and accuracy of the techniques. In this paper, we demonstrated the result of two hybrid techniques formed by combining iterative proportional fitting (IPF) and fanout estimation with well-known techniques such as tomogravity (TG), entropy maximization (EM) and Neural Network (NN) in producing improved estimation of the traffic matrix from link load data and sampled flow measurement. The low overhead of these hybrid techniques, as well as the significant reduction in error achieved, compared to using the gravity or similar prior estimates, makes them worthwhile approaches that can be adopted by Internet service providers (ISPs) for large-scale IP traffic matrix estimation.

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)0.005
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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.252
Teacher spread0.244 · 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

Citations15
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicSparse and Compressive Sensing TechniquesFrench-language works237,207