MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2097666420 · doi:10.1109/wimob.2008.19

Subscriber Mobility in Pub/Sub Systems: Pro-active vs. Reactive Handoffs

2008· article· en· W2097666420 on OpenAlexaff
Abdulbaset Gaddah, Thomas Kunz

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicCaching and Content Delivery
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceComputer networkTestbedHandoverTransfer (computing)Context (archaeology)ThroughputMobility managementMobile telephonyDistributed computingMobile radioTelecommunicationsWirelessOperating system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

To support mobile subscribers in pub/sub systems, existing approaches are mainly based on reactive methods (i.e., the message transfer occurs just after the mobile subscriber handoffs to a new broker). In this paper, we analyze a novel and efficient mobility extension based on a pro-active approach (i.e., the context transfer/caching occurs prior to the subscriber movement). We implemented both reactive and pro-active mobility extensions for JMS and conducted a range of experiments in a small testbed to compare the relative merits of each approach. Our experimental results show that a pro-active approach can provide fast handoff support with zero duplicated messages. It also achieves relatively higher throughput results and lower message loss compared to the reactive approach.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.361
Threshold uncertainty score0.546

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 science0.0000.000
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 head0.221
Teacher spread0.189 · 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 designObservational
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
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicCaching and Content DeliveryFrench-language works237,207