MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2097621495 · doi:10.1109/mdm.2009.25

SLA-Aware Adaptive On-demand Data Broadcasting in Wireless Environments

2009· article· en· W2097621495 on OpenAlexaff
Adrian Popescu, Mohamed A. Sharaf, Cristiana Amza

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicDistributed systems and fault tolerance
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceWorkloadScheduling (production processes)Computer networkBroadcasting (networking)WirelessQuality of serviceExploitDynamic priority schedulingDistributed computingReal-time computingTelecommunicationsOperating system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In mobile and wireless networks, data broadcasting for popular data items enables the efficient utilization of the limited wireless bandwidth. However, efficient data scheduling schemes are needed to fully exploit the benefits of data broadcasting. This motivated the proposal of several broadcast scheduling policies, which have mostly focused on either minimizing response time, or drop rate when requests are associated with hard deadlines. The inherent inaccuracy of hard deadlines in a dynamic mobile environment motivated us to use Service Level Agreements (SLAs) where a user specifies the utility of data as a function of its arrival time. Moreover, SLAs provide the mobile user with an already familiar quality of service specification from wired environments. Hence, in this paper, we propose SAAB which is an SLA-aware adaptive data broadcast scheduling policy for maximizing the system utility under SLA-based performance measures. To achieve this goal, SAAB considers both the characteristics of disseminated data objects as well as the SLAs associated with them. Additionally, SAAB automatically adjusts to the system workload conditions which enables it to constantly outperform existing on-demand broadcast scheduling policies.

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 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)0.000
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.974
Threshold uncertainty score0.466

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.043
GPT teacher head0.267
Teacher spread0.224 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations3
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicDistributed systems and fault toleranceFrench-language works237,207