MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2005223942 · doi:10.1109/mmit.2010.118

Optimal Cooperative Multi-Source Multimedia Transmission Scheduling in Peer-to-Peer Networks

2010· article· en· W2005223942 on OpenAlexaff
Pengbo Si, Yanhua Sun, Yanhua Zhang, F. Richard Yu

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicPeer-to-Peer Network Technologies
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceCommunication sourceComputer networkScheduling (production processes)Peer-to-peerDistributed computingScheme (mathematics)Key (lock)Transmission (telecommunications)Selection algorithmNetwork congestionSelection (genetic algorithm)Node (physics)File sharingMultimediaThe InternetTelecommunicationsMathematical optimizationNetwork packetComputer securityWorld Wide Web

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In peer-to-peer (P2P) networks, multiple sources multimedia transmission is one of the key technology in peer-to-peer (P2P) networks because of simultaneous multimedia file sharing. However, allowing all available sources to transmit to the destination node may result in serious network congestion. Thus the selection of multiple sources is one of the key issues in the design of multi-source multimedia transmission systems in P2P networks. In this paper, a cooperative multi-source sender selection scheme to minimize the multimedia distortion is proposed, based on recent advances in restless bandits algorithms. The proposed sender selection scheme has an indexability property that dramatically simplifies the computation and implementation of the policy. Furthermore, centralized control point is not necessary in the proposed scheme, and senders can join and leave from the P2P network freely. Extensive simulation results show that the proposed scheme reduces the distortion significantly compared to the existing 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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.290
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0030.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.272
Teacher spread0.255 · 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.

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

Citations0
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicPeer-to-Peer Network TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207