MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2004151710 · doi:10.1002/net.20090

Distributed delay constrained multicast routing algorithm with efficient fault recovery

2005· article· en· W2004151710 on OpenAlexaff
Hasan Ural, Keqin Zhu

Bibliographic record

VenueNetworks · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicNetwork Traffic and Congestion Control
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMulticastComputer scienceXcastPragmatic General MulticastProtocol Independent MulticastSource-specific multicastDistance Vector Multicast Routing ProtocolComputer networkDistributed computingInter-domainIP multicastAlgorithmReliable multicastTree (set theory)Mathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Existing distributed delay constrained multicast routing algorithms construct a multicast tree in a sequential fashion and need to be restarted when failures occur during the multicast tree construction phase or during an on‐going multicast session. This article proposes an efficient distributed delay constrained multicast routing algorithm that constructs a multicast tree in a concurrent fashion by taking advantage of the concurrency in the underlying distributed computation. The proposed algorithm has a message complexity of O( m n ) and time complexity of O( n ) in the worst case, where m is the number of destinations and n is the number of nodes in the network. It constructs multicast trees with the same tree costs as the ones constructed by well‐known algorithms such as DKPP and DSHP while utilizing 409 to 1734 times fewer messages and 56 to 364 times less time than these algorithms under comparable success rate ratios. The proposed algorithm has been augmented with a fault recovery mechanism that efficiently constructs a multicast tree when failures occur during the tree construction phase and recovers from any failure in the multicast tree during an on‐going multicast session without interrupting the running traffic on the unaffected portion of the tree. © 2005 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. NETWORKS, Vol. 47(1), 37–51 2006

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 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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.911
Threshold uncertainty score0.817

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.201
Teacher spread0.196 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations2
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNetworksSame topicNetwork Traffic and Congestion ControlFrench-language works237,207