MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2100685058 · doi:10.1109/icc.2006.254890

Statistical Delay Budget Partitioning Algorithm

2006· article· en· W2100685058 on OpenAlexaff
Najah Abu Ali, Saeed Gazor, Hussein T. Mouftah

Bibliographic record

Venue2006 IEEE International Conference on Communications · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced Optical Network Technologies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of OttawaQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsQuality of serviceComputer scienceAlgorithmHeuristicMetric (unit)Path (computing)Distributed computingComputer networkArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Mapping the end to end QoS requirements into link QoS requirements is an important step for resource allocation of connection oriented services. The problem of the QoS partitioning has been addressed in literature and proved to be NP complete. Different algorithms are proposed to solve the problem of single end-to-end QoS metric. However, these algorithms are near optimal or heuristic algorithms and solve the QoS partitioning problem for single QoS metric. In this paper, we propose a novel optimal partitioning algorithm which is capable of partitioning the end to end QoS requirement for multiple QoS metrics, additive and multiplicative, simultaneously. Extensive simulation verified the effectiveness of the algorithm compared to two QoS partitioning algorithms. The results show that the proposed algorithm outperforms the other two algorithms for loose and stringent QoS requirements and over different path lengths.

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)0.001
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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.025

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.002

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 head0.041
GPT teacher head0.309
Teacher spread0.268 · 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
GenreMethods

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

Citations1
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venue2006 IEEE International Conference on CommunicationsSame topicAdvanced Optical Network TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207