MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2095228834 · doi:10.1145/2831347.2831352

ReWiFlow

2015· article· en· W2095228834 on OpenAlexaff
Sajad Shirali-Shahreza, Yashar Ganjali

Bibliographic record

VenueACM SIGCOMM Computer Communication Review · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicSoftware-Defined Networks and 5G
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOpenFlowComputer scienceFlexibility (engineering)Software-defined networkingDistributed computingRouting (electronic design automation)Control flowGeneralizationClass (philosophy)Network packetComputer networkFlow control (data)Packet lossControl (management)Artificial intelligenceProgramming language

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The ability to manage individual flows is a major benefit of Software-Defined Networking. The overheads of this fine-grained control, e.g. initial flow setup delay, can overcome the benefits, for example when we have many time-sensitive short flows. Coarse-grained control of groups of flows, on the other hand, can be very complex: each packet may match multiple rules, which requires conflict resolution. In this paper, we present ReWiFlow, a restricted class of OpenFlow wildcard rules (the fundamental way to control groups of flows in OpenFlow), which allows managing groups of flows with flexibility and without loss of performance. We demonstrate how ReWiFlow can be used to implement applications such as dynamic proactive routing. We also present a generalization of ReWiFlow, called Multi-ReWiFlow, and show how it can be used to efficiently represent access control rules collected from Stanford's backbone network.

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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.000

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.004
Open science0.0040.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0110.005

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 head0.074
GPT teacher head0.300
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 designNot applicable
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

Citations24
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueACM SIGCOMM Computer Communication ReviewSame topicSoftware-Defined Networks and 5GFrench-language works237,207