MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2094484544 · doi:10.1145/1806565.1806591

Collaborative delay-aware scheduling in peer-to-peer UGC video sharing

2010· article· en· W2094484544 on OpenAlexaff
Xu Cheng, Feng Wang, Jiangchuan Liu, Ke Xu

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicPeer-to-Peer Network Technologies
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer sciencePeer-to-peerScheduling (production processes)The InternetShared resourceMultimediaFile sharingWorld Wide WebComputer network

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We have recently witnessed an explosion of user-generated content (UGC) sharing, particularly video clips, as the new killer Internet application. Given the sheer amount of resource demands, the peer-to-peer (or peer-assisted) model has been suggested for this new service scenario. There are however a series of unique challenges from the UGC videos to be addressed, in particular, their significantly shorter lengths. As such, any delay, even being minor as compared to those for conventional movie-like videos, will be perceptually amplified.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
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 score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.001
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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.275
Teacher spread0.262 · 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

Citations6
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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