MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2141116537 · doi:10.1109/glocom.2004.1378109

Design of edge-disjoint path protected WDM networks: asymptotic optimality of shortest path

2005· article· en· W2141116537 on OpenAlexaff
Mohamed Saad, Zhi‐Quan Luo

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced Optical Network Technologies
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsShortest path problemHeuristicMathematical optimizationDisjoint setsRouting (electronic design automation)Equal-cost multi-path routingLinear programmingPath (computing)Computer scienceWavelength-division multiplexingK shortest path routingLink-state routing protocolTopology (electrical circuits)MathematicsComputer networkDiscrete mathematicsCombinatoricsRouting protocolTheoretical computer scienceWavelengthGraph

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We address the problem of allocating fibers (each supporting only a limited set of wavelengths) on the links of a WDM network at minimum cost, such that a set of edge-disjoint path protected connection requests can be realized. The cost of a link is assumed to be linear in the number of fibers rather than being linear in the number of wavelengths used on this link, reflecting modular capacity considerations. Therefore, a solution induced by routing each connection "simply" along the minimum-cost (shortest) pair of edge-disjoint lightpaths may not minimize the total fiber cost. In this paper we quantify the increase in the total fiber cost due to this simple routing strategy. In particular, we prove that the cost of a solution induced by routing along shortest path pairs is guaranteed to lie within a certain factor of the minimum possible cost. This leads also to the fact that the cost of this solution is asymptotically minimum in heavily loaded networks, and in networks that are large, sparse and supporting all-to-all communications. En route, we prove that the optimal objective function value of the linear programming (LP) relaxation actually corresponds to routing along shortest path pairs. We have thus presented a provably good upper bound and a lower bound on the total fiber cost, that can be computed in polynomial-time, and can be used as benchmarks against which exact and heuristic approaches are compared.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.584
Threshold uncertainty score0.844

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 science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.214
Teacher spread0.200 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations2
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAdvanced Optical Network TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207