MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2069471802 · doi:10.1142/s0219265909002455

BALANCING TRAFFIC LOAD USING ONE-TURN RECTILINEAR ROUTING

2009· article· en· W2069471802 on OpenAlexaff
Stéphane Durocher, Evangelos Kranakis, Danny Kriz̧anc, Lata Narayanan

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Interconnection Networks · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicMobile Ad Hoc Networks
Canadian institutionsConcordia UniversityCarleton UniversityUniversity of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceRouting (electronic design automation)Equal-cost multi-path routingStatic routingPath (computing)Load balancing (electrical power)Path vector protocolReduction (mathematics)Mathematical optimizationTopology (electrical circuits)Computer networkMathematicsRouting protocolCombinatoricsGeometryGrid

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We consider the problem of load-balanced routing, where a dense network is modelled by a continuous square region, and origin-destination node pairs correspond to pairs of points in that region. The objective is to define a routing policy that assigns a continuous path to each origin-destination pair while minimizing the traffic, or load, passing through any single point. While the average load is minimized by straight-line routing, such a routing policy distributes the load non-uniformly, resulting in higher load near the center of the region. We consider one-turn rectilinear routing policies that divert traffic away from regions of heavier load, resulting in up to a 33% reduction in the maximum load while simultaneously increasing the path lengths by an average of less than 28%. Our policies are simple to implement, being both local and oblivious. We provide a lower bound that shows that no one-turn rectilinear routing policy can reduce the maximum load by more than 39% and we give a polynomial-time procedure for approximating the optimal randomized policy.

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)0.003
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 score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.257
Teacher spread0.238 · 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
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Interconnection NetworksSame topicMobile Ad Hoc NetworksFrench-language works237,207