MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2010653505 · doi:10.1002/dac.552

Recovery from control plane failures in GMPLS‐controlled optical networks

2002· article· en· W2010653505 on OpenAlexaff
Jing Wu, Delfin Y. Montuno, Hussein T. Mouftah, Guoqiang Wang, Abel Dasylva

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Communication Systems · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced Optical Network Technologies
Canadian institutionsQueen's UniversityNortel (Canada)Communications Research Centre Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer networkComputer scienceForwarding planeNode (physics)Routing and wavelength assignmentInitializationRouting protocolRouting control planeProtocol (science)Routing (electronic design automation)Wavelength-division multiplexingNetwork packetWavelengthOpticsMedicinePhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The health status of the control plane and the data plane of a GMPLS‐controlled optical network is independent in the physically separated control network implementation. In most control plane designs, besides the topology information, the entities of the routing protocol only record the number of available wavelengths on each link. However, the status of each wavelength is maintained by the entities of the signalling protocol. Without recovery ability of the signalling protocol CR‐LDP, a failure in the control plane will result in the permanent loss of the status information of wavelengths. A mechanism to recover the status information of the wavelengths is proposed. A downstream node maintains a label information database (LID) about assignable (free) labels in each incoming link. A copy of LID is redundantly stored in the upstream node as a label information mirror (LIM). A systematic procedure is proposed to synchronize the contents of a LIM and the corresponding LID. The initialization of a new LDP session with the enhanced recovery mechanism will guarantee the revival of the status information of wavelengths. It can recover multiple control channel failures, but it only applies to single node failure among any pair of adjacent nodes. © Crown copyright 2002. Reproduced with the permission of Her Majesty's Stationery Office. Published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

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)0.002
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.228
Teacher spread0.216 · 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

Citations4
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Communication SystemsSame topicAdvanced Optical Network TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207