MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2021629824 · doi:10.1117/12.792516

All-optical swapping of spectral amplitude code labels for packet-switched networks

2008· article· en· W2021629824 on OpenAlexafffund
Lawrence R. Chen

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of SPIE, the International Society for Optical Engineering/Proceedings of SPIE · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicOptical Network Technologies
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaMcGill UniversityUniversité Laval
KeywordsComputer scienceOptical amplifierMultiprotocol Label SwitchingPhotonicsNetwork packetOptical switchPacket switchingElectronic engineeringCircuit switchingLabel switchingModulation (music)LaserOptoelectronicsComputer networkOpticsMaterials sciencePhysicsQuality of service

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Packet-switched networks have attracted considerable attention as a basis for next-generation optical networks due to their advantages in terms of flexibility and network efficiency over traditional circuit-switched networks. Optical code multi-protocol label switching (OC-MPLS) promises fast, flexible, power-efficient switching by keeping signals in the optical domain and avoiding costly conversions to the electrical domain. In this paper, we review the use of spectral amplitude codes (SACs) for implementing OC-MPLS labels. We discuss the principles and features, as well as key enabling technologies required for their processing. In particular, we compare three different approaches for low cost all-optical swapping of SAC labels. All approaches are based on semiconductor fiber lasers and exploit nonlinearity in a semiconductor device: the first uses cross-absorption modulation in an electroabsorption modulator, the second uses cross-gain modulation (XGM) in a semiconductor optical amplifier (SOA), and the third makes use of XGM in an SOA as well as injection locking in a Fabry-Pérot laser. We present the static and dynamic responses of each for swapping a multi-wavelength input label to a multi-wavelength output label. The benefits and limitations of each approach as well as future improvements are discussed. We also present the results of systems experiments which demonstrate error-free all-optical label swapping, recognition, and switching of multi-rate packets in packet-switched networks using multi-wavelength labels.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.232
Teacher spread0.214 · 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

Citations0
Published2008
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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