MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2117656647 · doi:10.1109/glocom.2009.5426007

Differentiated Quality of Service in Survivable WDM Mesh Networks

2009· article· en· W2117656647 on OpenAlexafffund
Samir Sebbah, Brigitte Jaumard

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced Optical Network Technologies
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaConcordia University
KeywordsComputer scienceScalabilityQuality of serviceBandwidth (computing)Computer networkReliability (semiconductor)Service (business)Service providerTelecommunications serviceService guaranteeNetwork planning and designDistributed computingService designBusiness

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The emerging next generation optical transport WDM networks, with reconfigurable optical switches, offer a promising solution to the ever-increasing demand for high bandwidth and flexible connectivity. In order to meet the needs of such a demand, the trend in current backbone and access network development is moving toward a unified solution that will support different classes of service such as voice, data, and a large range of multimedia applications. However, those applications come with different qualities of service (i.e., bandwidth, reliability, and availability) depending on their requirements and on how much the users are willing to pay for the services. In the design of protection schemes in survivable WDM networks, there is a trade-off to be set between the capacity efficiency and the quality of service parameters. Differentiation of the provided quality of service can help in finding an appropriate trade-off between network cost and quality of service, for both service providers and customers. In this paper, we propose different network design optimization models in order to optimize two quality of service (QoS) protection parameters: Protection capacity sharing and recovery delay. We use shared protection schemes based on pre-configured structures that are pre-cross connected ahead of failures, and that are dynamically reconfigured in case of a failure. The resulting optimization models are solved using large scale optimization tools in order to ensure scalable solutions. Comparisons are conducted on different network and traffic instances, and a thorough analysis is made, exploring the added values of pre-cross connected protections structures on protection QoS.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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 score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.254
Teacher spread0.235 · 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

Citations5
Published2009
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAdvanced Optical Network TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207