MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2123196001 · doi:10.1109/jsac.2010.100105

Autonomic traffic engineering for network robustness

2010· article· en· W2123196001 on OpenAlexaff
Ali Tizghadam, Alberto Leon‐Garcia

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Journal on Selected Areas in Communications · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicSoftware-Defined Networks and 5G
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRobustness (evolution)Computer scienceDistributed computingNetwork topologyComputer networkNetwork traffic controlComplex network

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The continuously increasing complexity of communication networks and the increasing diversity and unpredictability of traffic demand has led to a consensus view that the automation of the management process is inevitable. Currently, network and service management techniques are mostly manual, requiring human intervention, and leading to slow response times, high costs, and customer dissatisfaction. In this paper we present AutoNet, a self-organizing management system for core networks where robustness to environmental changes, namely traffic shifts, topology changes, and community of interest is viewed as critical. A framework to design robust control strategies for autonomic networks is proposed. The requirements of the network are translated to graph-theoretic metrics and the management system attempts to automatically evolve to a stable and robust control point by optimizing these metrics. The management approach is inspired by ideas from evolutionary science where a metric, network criticality, measures the survival value or robustness of a particular network configuration. In our system, network criticality is a measure of the robustness of the network to environmental changes. The control system is designed to direct the evolution of the system state in the direction of increasing robustness. As an application of our framework, we propose a traffic engineering method in which different paths are ranked based on their robustness measure, and the best path is selected to route the flow. The choice of the path is in the direction of preserving the robustness of the network to the unforeseen changes in topology and traffic demands. Furthermore, we develop a method for capacity assignment to optimize the robustness of the network.

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)0.004
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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.260
Teacher spread0.239 · 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

Citations117
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Journal on Selected Areas in CommunicationsSame topicSoftware-Defined Networks and 5GFrench-language works237,207