MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2100841561

User-managed QoS: Model and validation

2008· article· en· W2100841561 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Symposium on Performance Evaluation of Computer and Telecommunication Systems · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicNetwork Traffic and Congestion Control
Canadian institutionsInstitut National de la Recherche Scientifique
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceQuality of serviceScalabilityArchitectureTelephonyComputer networkService (business)Quality (philosophy)Simple (philosophy)Distributed computingControl (management)DatabaseArtificial intelligence
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Corporate networks are moving towards an ldquoall-IPrdquo architecture as even performance-critical applications such as telephony are migrating to an IP base. Still, end-to-end Quality of Service (QoS) issues remain to be resolved to provide a seamless converged network that will satisfy the combined needs of all applications. This problem has been the subject of much research, still without conclusive results. We present in this paper an architecture to address this issue from the userspsila perspective and control. We also describe how this architecture was validated and the results we have derived from our experiments. We show that it is possible for users to control their quality of service using simple, easily scalable means and present some typical profiles which have emerged from our experiences. This work also gives us hints on the model ling of user behavior facing budgetary constraints.

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.

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)0.001
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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.224
Threshold uncertainty score0.577

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.271
Teacher spread0.237 · 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