LBMP: A Logarithm-Barrier-Based Multipath Protocol for Internet Traffic Management
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Traffic management is the adaptation of source rates and routing to efficiently utilize network resources. Recently, the complicated interactions between different Internet traffic management modules have been elegantly modeled by distributed primal-dual utility maximization, which sheds new light for developing effective management protocols. For single-path routing with given routes, the dual is a strictly concave network optimization problem. Unfortunately, the general form of multipath utility optimization is not strictly concave, making its solution quite unstable. Decomposition-based techniques like TRaffic-management Using Multipath Protocol (TRUMP) alleviates the instability, but their convergence is not guaranteed, nor is their optimality. They are also inflexible in differentiating the control at different links. In this paper, we address the above issues through a novel logarithm-barrier-based approach. Our approach jointly considers user utility and routing/congestion control. It translates the multipath utility maximization into a sequence of unconstrained optimization problems, with infinite logarithm barriers being deployed at the constraint boundary. We demonstrate that setting up barriers is much simpler than choosing traditional cost functions and, more importantly, it makes optimal solution achievable. We further demonstrate a distributed implementation, together with the design of a practical Logarithm Barrier-based-Multipath Protocol (LBMP). We evaluate the performance of LBMP through both numerical analysis and packet-level simulations. The results show that LBMP achieves high throughput and fast convergence over diverse representative network topologies. Such performance is comparable to TRUMP, and is often better. Moreover, LBMP is flexible in differentiating the control at different links, and its optimality and convergence are theoretically guaranteed.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".