MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2113967535 · doi:10.1109/iccnc.2013.6504164

Mitigating the asymmetric interests among peers in peer-to-peer video-on-demand systems

2013· article· en· W2113967535 on OpenAlexaff
S. Sarkar, Mea Wang

Bibliographic record

Venue2013 International Conference on Computing, Networking and Communications (ICNC) · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicCooperative Communication and Network Coding
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceVideo on demandIncentiveExploitPeer-to-peerOn demandMultimediaCoding (social sciences)The InternetComputer networkVideo streamingWorld Wide WebComputer security

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In recent years, Peer-to-Peer (P2P) multimedia streaming has become an alternative to cable/satellite TV services. Many P2P streaming applications further provide users with DVD-like operations: play, pause, chapter selection, fast forward, and rewind. Such a real-time interactive multimedia streaming system is commonly referred to as P2P Video-on-Demand (VoD), and poses a unique challenge in providing smooth playback and seamless interaction over the Internet. In a typical P2P VoD system, a peer may play an arbitrary video segment at any time, which leads to asymmetric interests among peers. On one hand, the asymmetric interests reduce the incentives for peers to cooperate with each other. On the other hand, the asymmetric interests create more opportunities for content sharing. In this paper, we propose Coded VoD, a new approach for P2P VoD streaming, that exploits the content sharing opportunities in P2P VoD to address the incentive issue. Our experimental results show that Coded VoD achieves a smoother playback and faster responses to DVD-like operations by utilizing a network-coding-based content prefetching mechanism.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.012
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.018

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.012
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.004
Open science0.0030.004
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.072
GPT teacher head0.317
Teacher spread0.245 · 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
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations2
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venue2013 International Conference on Computing, Networking and Communications (ICNC)Same topicCooperative Communication and Network CodingFrench-language works237,207