QoS-Aware Streaming in Overlay Multicast Considering the Selfishness in Construction Action
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Most existing overlay multicast proposals have assumed that the nodes are cooperative and thus focus on the global topology optimization. However, a unique and important characteristic of overlay nodes is that, as application-layer agents, they can be selfish with their own interests. To achieve better quality-of-service (QoS) or to minimize forwarding overhead, an overlay node can behave selfishly in the information collection or in the overlay construction. While the former has recently been investigated, the impact of selfishness in the construction action remains unclear. In this paper, we present the first systematic study on the impact of selfishness in both tree and mesh overlay construction. Our investigation considers multiple QoS measures for streaming applications, including stream latency, resolution, and continuity. Our contribution is twofold: first, we analyze how for selfish overlay nodes to choose a construction-action policy to optimize their individual multi-metric QoS. Second, we demonstrate that the selfishness-aware policy for the construction action is consistent with the QoS optimization for the global multicast session, but not vice versa. The implication is significant: A globally optimal overlay construction itself can be vulnerable to individual selfishness; but, following our directions, we can design an overlay that is both globally optimal and selfish-resistant.
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 | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 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".