A survey of congestion control schemes for multicast video applications
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
Congestion control for IP multicast on the Internet has been one of the main issues that challenge a rapid deployment of IP multicast. In this article, we survey and discuss the most important congestion control schemes for multicast video applications on the Internet. We start with a discussion of the different elements of a multicast congestion control architecture. A congestion control scheme for multicast video possesses specific requirements for these elements. These requirements are discussed, along with the evaluation criteria for the performance of multicast video. We categorize the schemes we present into end-to-end schemes and router-supported schemes. We start with the end-to-end category and discuss several examples of both single-rate multicast applications and layered multicast applications. For the router-supported category, we first present single-rate schemes that utilize filtering of multicast packets by the routers. Next we discuss receiver-based layered schemes that rely on routers group/flow control of multicast sessions. We evaluate a number of schemes that belong to each of the two categories.
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 | 0.009 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 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