MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2025900923 · doi:10.1117/12.434331

<title>Monitoring information model for traffic engineering over MPLS VPNs</title>

2001· article· en· W2025900923 on OpenAlexaff
Omar Cherkaoui, Alain Sarrazin, Guy Francoeur, Ken Chen

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of SPIE, the International Society for Optical Engineering/Proceedings of SPIE · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced Optical Network Technologies
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMultiprotocol Label SwitchingComputer networkTraffic engineeringComputer scienceRouting (electronic design automation)Point (geometry)Service (business)Service providerQuality of serviceBusiness

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Monitoring is the part of Traffic Engineering (TE) that aims at optimizing the use of network resources and assists both in informing the provider and proving to the customer that the service offered respects the SLAs required to optimize the network resources utilization. In this paper, we present a monitoring framework for MPLS-VPN services. We first briefly review MPLS, VPN, NBVPN, Constrained Based Routing to provide a background for the discussion of traffic Engineering. We then discuss the general issues surrounding the design of a MPLS VPN from the point of view of TE and go on to present a management framework that extends the DEN information specific to MPLS VPNs. In this framework, we add policy actions that react dynamically to abnormal results by changing the sampling frequency.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.027

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0040.005
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.221
Teacher spread0.211 · 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 designNot applicable
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
Published2001
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