MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2081912802 · doi:10.4018/jamc.2012040102

A Survey of Ant Colony Optimization Algorithms for Telecommunication Networks

2012· article· en· W2081912802 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Applied Metaheuristic Computing · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicMobile Ad Hoc Networks
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec en Outaouais
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAnt colony optimization algorithmsComputer scienceQuality of serviceComputer networkDistributed computingRouting (electronic design automation)Network congestionAlgorithm

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Optical and ad-hoc networks which fulfill the communications requirements of complex applications must meet the Quality of Service (QoS) demanded by these applications, such as transmission delay. These demands are hard to satisfy in the presence of unpredictable behavior in the environment such as interference, traffic congestion, etc. Algorithms based on Ant Colony Optimization (ACO) offer an effective approach to meet such challenges since they are well suited to the dynamic routing optimization and dynamic resource reassignment required by these applications. In this paper, the author presents a survey of Ant Colony Optimization variants applied to ad-hoc and optical networks. The ACO variant called AntHocNet in particular will be reviewed, analyzed, and criticized from the point of view of emergent applications for environment management such as Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS).

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.660
Threshold uncertainty score0.568

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0020.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.301
Teacher spread0.269 · 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