MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2061511005 · doi:10.1145/1730836.1730853

Analysis of peer-assisted video-on-demand systems with scalable video streams

2010· article· en· W2061511005 on OpenAlexaff
Kianoosh Mokhtarian, Mohamed Hefeeda

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicPeer-to-Peer Network Technologies
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceScalabilityThroughputPeer-to-peerVideo streamingReal Time Streaming ProtocolQuality (philosophy)Real-time computingComputer networkMultimediaVideo qualityDistributed computingDatabaseWorld Wide WebThe InternetTelecommunicationsWireless

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In recent years, peer-to-peer (P2P) and peer-assisted streaming have emerged as promising models for low-cost multimedia distribution to large scale user communities. In this paper, we study streaming of scalable video streams over these systems. Scalable video streams are composed of multiple layers and can easily be adapted according to the characteristics and needs of receivers. Thus, they can efficiently support a wide spectrum of heterogeneous peers participating in a P2P streaming system. We present an analytical model for forecasting the long-term behavior of a P2P streaming system with scalable video streams. Our analysis takes as inputs the characteristics of a dynamic P2P streaming system and the video streams. It then analytically computes the expected throughput of the streaming system and the expected video quality delivered to peers. The analysis also provides an upper bound on the maximum number of peers that can be admitted to the system at once (i.e., in flash crowd scenarios), while ensuring a certain video quality. We present a general analysis framework that can be customized to various practical P2P streaming systems with different characteristics. Then, we show the detailed analysis of a typical P2P streaming system and we explain how other systems can be analyzed using our model. We validate our analysis by comparing its results to those obtained from simulations, which confirm the accuracy of our analysis. Our analysis and simulations enable administrators of P2P streaming systems to predict the throughput and the video quality that can be delivered to users.

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)0.005
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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.031

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.237
Teacher spread0.226 · 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

Citations16
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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