MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2147638067 · doi:10.1109/ccece.2009.5090137

PWCE design in survivablewdm networks using unrestricted shape p-structure patterns

2009· article· en· W2147638067 on OpenAlexaff
Samir Sebbah, Brigitte Jaumard

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced Optical Network Technologies
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBackupRedundancy (engineering)Computer scienceReliability (semiconductor)Network planning and designDistributed computingBlock (permutation group theory)Mathematical optimizationReliability engineeringMathematicsComputer networkEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We propose a new way to design a Protected Working Capacity Envelope (PWCE) in survivable WDM networks by using pre-configured protection structures with unrestricted shapes (arbitrary shape patterns). So far, the pre-configured cycle (p-cycle) structure is the only building block that has been used in the design of PWCEs. In this paper, we do not impose any restriction on the shapes of the protection building blocks, rather, we search for p-structures in the network that favor the protection efficiency (reliability, redundancy) and recovery delay (local recovery). In order to cope with the large solution space, we use an efficient large scale optimization technique that relies on Column Generation (CG) where only globally most promising p-structures are enumerated on the fly during the optimization process. We compare the capacity efficiency, the reliability, and the average length of the backup paths of our PWCE design approach with the p-cycle based one. The results show that a design based on unrestricted p-structure patterns is ~10% less capacity redundant, ~15% more reliable, and allow recovery along shorter backup paths compared to the p-cycle based scheme.

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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.636
Threshold uncertainty score0.822

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.229
Teacher spread0.211 · 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
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

Citations2
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAdvanced Optical Network TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207