MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2050323422 · doi:10.1364/jon.5.000107

Deployment of an advance metropolitan gigabit Ethernet network: experience from the Attica Telecom case

2006· article· en· W2050323422 on OpenAlexaff
Lampros Raptis, Manos Manousakis, David Noguer Bau

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Optical Networking · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced Optical Network Technologies
Canadian institutionsNortel (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMetro EthernetComputer networkCarrier EthernetGigabit EthernetEthernet over PDHConnection-oriented EthernetEthernet over SDHTelecommunicationsComputer scienceSynchronous EthernetLocal area networkEthernetEthernet flow control

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

href="http://www.osa-jon.org/virtual_issue.cfm?vid=7" Feature Issue on Optical Ethernet (OE). Since the introduction of Ethernet technology in the 1980s, Ethernet has undergone major modifications and recent advances such as the support of 10 G interfaces, the resilient packet ring (RPR) standard, the Ethernet passive optical networks (EPONs), and so on have transformed Ethernet from a dominant local area network (LAN) networking technology to a key, flexible and cost-effective networking technology for metropolitan area networks (MANs). The purpose of this paper is to assess Ethernet maturity for deployment in MANs, based on different assessment criteria such as service provisioning and delivery (scalability issues related to the media access control (MAC) addresses and the supported number of virtual LAN identifiers), network protection and restoration as well as network and service management (provisioning of Ethernet services, fault identification, and monitoring). This assessment is based on a real-case scenario of deploying an advance metropolitan gigabit Ethernet network from a network service provider in Greece, Attica Telecom.

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)0.002
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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.254
Teacher spread0.240 · 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 designObservational
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
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Optical NetworkingSame topicAdvanced Optical Network TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207