MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2036310024 · doi:10.1109/lcn.2012.6423681

Dynamic file bundling for large-scale content distribution

2012· article· en· W2036310024 on OpenAlexaff
Song Zhang, Niklas Carlsson, Derek L. Eager, Zongpeng Li, Anirban Mahanti

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicPeer-to-Peer Network Technologies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of SaskatchewanUniversity of Calgary
FundersNational ICT Australia
KeywordsComputer scienceScale (ratio)Content distributionDatabaseComputer network

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

One highly-scalable approach to content delivery is to harness the upload bandwidth of the clients. Peer-assisted content delivery systems have been shown to effectively offload the servers of popular files, as the request rates of popular content enable the formation of self-sustaining torrents, where the entire content of the file is available among the peers themselves. However, for less popular files, these systems are less helpful in offloading servers. With a long tail of mildly popular content, with a high aggregate demand, a large fraction of the file requests must still be handled by servers. In this paper, we present the design, implementation, and evaluation of a dynamic file bundling system, where peers are requested to download content which they may not otherwise download in order to “inflate” the popularity of less popular files. Our system introduces the idea of a super bundle, which consists of a large catalogue of files. From this catalogue, smaller bundles, consisting of a small set of files, can dynamically be assigned to individual users. The system can dynamically adjust the number of downloaders of each file and thus enables the popularity inflation to be optimized according to current file popularities and the desired tradeoff between download times and server resource usage. The system is evaluated on PlanetLab.

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)0.004
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.003
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.260
Teacher spread0.234 · 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

Citations5
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicPeer-to-Peer Network TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207