Mitigating the asymmetric interests among peers in peer-to-peer video-on-demand systems
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
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.
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 | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 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 it