MINTED: <italic>M</italic>ulticast <italic>VI</italic>rtual <italic>N</italic>e<italic>T</italic>work <italic>E</italic>mbedding in Cloud Data Centers With <italic>D</italic>elay Constraints
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Network virtualization is regarded as the pillar of cloud computing, enabling the multi-tenancy concept where multiple Virtual Networks (VNs) can cohabit the same substrate network. With network virtualization, the problem of allocating resources to the various tenants, commonly known as the Virtual Network Embedding problem, emerges as a challenge. Its NP-Hard nature has drawn a lot of attention from the research community, many of which however overlooked the type of communication that a given VN may exhibit, assuming that they all exhibit a one-to-one (unicast) communication only. In this paper, we motivate the importance of characterizing the mode of communication in VN requests, and we focus our attention on the problem of embedding VNs with a one-to-many (multicast) communication mode. Throughout this paper, we highlight the unique properties of multicast VNs and its distinct Quality of Service (QoS) requirements, most notably the end-delay and delay-variation constraints for delay-sensitive multicast services. Further, we showcase the limitations of handling a multicast VN as unicast. To this extent, we formally define the VNE problem for Multicast VNs (MVNs) and prove its NP-Hard nature. We propose two novel approach to solve the Multicast VNE (MVNE) problem with end-delay and delay variation constraints: A 3-Step MVNE technique, and a Tabu-Search algorithm. We motivate the intuition behind our proposed embedding techniques, and provide a competitive analysis of our suggested approaches over multiple metrics and against other embedding heuristics.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.770 | 0.664 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".