MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2118572431 · doi:10.1109/iscc.2003.1214095

A strict priority scheme for quality-of-service provisioning in optical burst switching networks

2004· article· en· W2118572431 on OpenAlexaff
Ayman Kaheel, Hussein Alnuweiri

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced Optical Network Technologies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer networkComputer scienceQuality of serviceOptical burst switchingProvisioningNetwork packetScheduling (production processes)Queueing theoryMultiplexingCircuit switchingWavelength-division multiplexingOptical performance monitoringTelecommunicationsEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Classical approaches to quality-of-service (QoS) provisioning in IP networks are difficult to apply in all-optical networks. This is mainly because there is no optical counterpart to the store-and-forward model that mandates the use of buffers for queuing packets during contention for bandwidth in electronic packet switches. Since plain IP assumes a best effort service model, there is a need to devise mechanisms for QoS provisioning in IP over wavelength-division-multiplexing, or IP-over-WDM, networks. In this paper, we propose a new scheme; called preemptive prioritized just enough time (PPJET), for QoS provisioning in buffer-less optical burst switching (OBS) networks. PPJET provides strict priority for high priority traffic by dropping reservations belonging to lower priority traffic using a new channel scheduling algorithm called preemptive latest available unused channel with void filling (PLAUC-VF). Furthermore, we study the performance of PPJET through simulation experiments, and we show that PPJET outperforms prioritized just enough time (PJET) in terms of dropping probability and end-to-end delay.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.287
Teacher spread0.265 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations36
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAdvanced Optical Network TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207