Minimum-Delay Multicast Algorithms for Mesh Overlays
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
We study delivering delay-sensitive data to a group of receivers with minimum latency. This latency consists of the time that the data spends in overlay links as well as the delay incurred at each overlay node, which has to send out a piece of data several times over a finite-capacity network connection. The latter part is a significant portion of the total delay as we show in the paper, yet it is often ignored or only partially addressed by previous multicast algorithms. We analyze the actual delay in multicast trees and consider building trees with minimum-average and minimum-maximum delay. We show the NP-hardness of these problems and prove that they cannot be approximated in polynomial time to within any reasonable approximation ratio. We then present a set of algorithms to build minimum-delay multicast trees that cover a wide range of application requirements-min-average and min-max delay, for different scales, real-time requirements, and session characteristics. We conduct comprehensive experiments on different real-world datasets, using various overlay network models. The results confirm that our algorithms can achieve much lower delays (up to 60% less) and up to orders-of-magnitude faster running times (i.e., supporting larger scales) than previous related approaches.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 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