MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2121138975 · doi:10.1109/noms.2004.1317671

Quality of service provisioning for VoIP applications with policy-enabled differentiated services

2004· article· en· W2121138975 on OpenAlexaff
Raphael M. Bahati, Michael Bauer

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicService-Oriented Architecture and Web Services
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsVoice over IPComputer scienceDifferentiated servicesQuality of serviceScalabilityProvisioningThe InternetComputer networkDifferentiated serviceService (business)Distributed computingService delivery frameworkWorld Wide WebService designOperating system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The recent advancement in network technologies has made it possible for the convergence of voice and data networks. In particular, the differentiated services (DiffServ) model has helped in bridging the diverse performance requirements between voice and non real-time applications such as file transfer and e-mail. One key feature of the DiffServ model is its promise to bring scalable service discrimination to the Internet and intranets. With the heterogeneous nature of today's distributed systems, however, there is a demand for flexible management systems that can cope with not only changes in resource needs and the perceived quality of applications (which is often user-dependent and application-specific), but also changes in the configuration of the distributed environment. Policy-based management has been proposed as a means of providing dynamic change in the behavior of applications and systems at run-time rather than through reengineering. The paper proposes a policy-enabled DiffServ architecture to provide predictable and measurable quality of service (QoS) for voice over Internet Protocol (VoIP) applications, and illustrates its performance.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.729
Threshold uncertainty score0.927

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.274
Teacher spread0.263 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations4
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicService-Oriented Architecture and Web ServicesFrench-language works237,207