MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2133968725

Multi-hop Greedy Gossip with Eavesdropping

2009· article· en· W2133968725 on OpenAlexaff
Deniz Üstebay, Boris N. Oreshkin, Mark Coates, Michael Rabbat

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicDistributed Control Multi-Agent Systems
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGossipNetwork topologyComputer scienceHop (telecommunications)Wireless sensor networkEavesdroppingWireless networkWirelessComputer networkTopology (electrical circuits)MathematicsTelecommunications
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract – Greedy Gossip with Eavesdropping (GGE) is a randomized gossip algorithm that computes the average consensus by exploiting the broadcast nature of wireless communications. Each node eavesdrops on its immediate neighbors to track their values so that when it comes time to gossip, a node can myopically exchange information with the neighbor that will give the greatest immediate improvement in local squared error. In previous work, we showed that the improvement achieved using GGE over standard randomized gossip (i.e., exchanging information equally often with all neighbors) is proportional to the maximum node degree. Thus, for network topologies such as random geometric graphs, where node degree grows with the network size, the improvements of GGE scale with network size, but for grid-like topologies, where the node degree remains constant, GGE yields limited improvement. This paper presents an extension to GGE, which we call “multi-hop GGE”, that improves the rate of convergence for grid-like topologies. Multi-hop GGE relies on artificially increasing neighborhood size by performing greedy updates with nodes beyond one hop neighborhoods. We show that multi-hop GGE converges to the average consensus and illustrate via simulation that multi-hop GGE improves the performance of GGE for different network topologies.

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)0.002
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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.240
Teacher spread0.220 · 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

Citations1
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicDistributed Control Multi-Agent SystemsFrench-language works237,207