Multiple source, multiple destination network tomography
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The problem of identifying topology and inferring link-level performance parameters such as packet drop rate or delay variance using only end-to-end measurements is commonly referred to as network tomography. This paper describes a collaborative framework for performing network tomography on topologies with multiple sources and multiple destinations, without assuming the topology to be known. Using multiple sources potentially provides a more accurate and refined characterization of the internal network. We present a novel multiple source active measurement procedure using a semirandomized probing scheme and packet arrival order measurements which do not require precise synchronization between the participating hosts. A decision-theoretic framework is developed enabling the joint characterization of topology and internal performance. We design a statistical test based on the generalized likelihood ratio test and Wilks' theorem. The test quantifies the tradeoff between network topology complexity and performance estimation, and identifies when measurements made by the two sources can be combined to achieve reduced variance performance estimates. The performance and efficacy of the algorithm are assessed through ns-2 simulations and experiments over the Internet
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it