MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2125954500 · doi:10.1109/infcom.1990.91255

An Ethernet-like CSMA/CD protocol for high speed bus LANs

2002· article· en· W2125954500 on OpenAlexaff
W. Dobosiewicz, Paweł Gburzyński, Piotr Rudnicki

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicWireless Networks and Protocols
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEthernetComputer networkATA over EthernetLocal area networkComputer scienceProtocol (science)Synchronous EthernetEthernet over SDHMetro EthernetCarrier EthernetEthernet flow controlEmbedded system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A collision protocol called piggyback Ethernet which is applicable for fast bus-type networks based on single, uniform, unsegmented, broadcast-type carriers is presented. Although piggyback Ethernet assumes that each station possesses certain global knowledge about the geometry of the network, it is argued that this knowledge can be acquired automatically at a reasonably small expense. The performance of the protocol for very heavy traffic is not worse than the performance of other protocols operating in a completely synchronized manner. The advantage this solution is its very good performance for light loads which is, for practical purposes, not worse than the performance of Ethernet. Moreover, compared to other protocols for fast networks, piggyback Ethernet has quite modest hardware requirements. The network is based on a straightforward bidirectional cable, each station has only one connection to the bus, and the actual length of the carrier is not bigger than the maximum distance between two stations.< <ETX xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">&gt;</ETX>

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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Protocol · Consensus signal: Protocol
Teacher disagreement score0.494
Threshold uncertainty score0.662

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.053
GPT teacher head0.315
Teacher spread0.262 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreProtocol

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
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicWireless Networks and ProtocolsFrench-language works237,207