MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2133630653 · doi:10.1109/ccgrid.2004.1336572

GTP: group transport protocol for lambda-grids

2004· article· en· W2133630653 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Ruiwen Wu, Andrew A. Chien

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicNetwork Traffic and Congestion Control
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersCanarieNational Science Foundation
KeywordsComputer networkComputer scienceBandwidth (computing)Wavelength-division multiplexingDistributed computingMultiplexingGTP'Transfer (computing)ThroughputProtocol (science)WirelessTelecommunicationsWavelengthPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The notion of lambda-Grids posits plentiful collections of computing and storage resources richly interconnected by dedicated dense wavelength division multiplexing (DWDM) optical paths. In lambda-Grids, the DWDM links form a network with plentiful bandwidth, pushing contention and sharing bottlenecks to the end systems (or their network links) and motivating the group transport protocol (GTP). GTP features a request-response data transfer model, rate-based explicit flow control, and more importantly, receiver-centric max-min fair rate allocation across multiple flows to support multipoint-to-point data movement. Our studies show that GTP performs as well as other UDP based aggressive transport protocols (e.g. RBUDP, SABUL) for single flows, and when converging flows (from multiple senders to one receiver) are introduced, GTP achieves both high throughput and much lower loss rates than others. This superior performance is due to new techniques in GTP for managing end system contention.

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)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Software · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.023

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.005

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.267
Teacher spread0.250 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreSoftware

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

Citations45
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicNetwork Traffic and Congestion ControlFrench-language works237,207