MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2016260063 · doi:10.1117/12.482438

<title>Design-survivable WDM networks using a path protection algorithm</title>

2002· article· en· W2016260063 on OpenAlexaff
ZhenJiang Han, Ioannis Lambadaris

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of SPIE, the International Society for Optical Engineering/Proceedings of SPIE · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced Optical Network Technologies
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPath protectionComputer sciencePath (computing)ScalabilitySpare partWavelength-division multiplexingSurvivabilityComputer networkDistributed computingShared resourceEngineeringWavelength

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A major challenge of survivable wavelength-division multiplexing (WDM) network design is deciding how much spare capacity there should be and where it should be placed, so that interrupted traffic can be recovered within a very short time. Protection, including link protection and path protection, is the main way to solve this problem and to prevent huge losses. Link protection and dedicated path protection currently dominate this fault recovery field. Both have short recovery time and low resource efficiency. Shared path protection is also resource efficient with acceptable recovery time. More and more industries recognize that shared path protection is the trend and are trying to find good methods to design shared protection paths. This paper proposes a new efficient algorithm-Predetermined Protection Path Design (PPD), which can design maximum sharing protection paths. We describe in detail how PPD works, and compare it with the existing protection algorithms. Simulation results show that PPD can design maximum sharing protection paths and achieve 28% better resource efficiency than dedicated path protection as well as 12% better resource efficiency than the current shared path protection algorithms, with acceptable recovery time. PPD also has good generality, scalability and restorability.

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 score0.939

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 science0.0000.000
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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.211
Teacher spread0.194 · 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

Citations1
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of SPIE, the International Society for Optical Engineering/Proceedings of SPIESame topicAdvanced Optical Network TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207