Optimization models for reliable long-reach PON deployment
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Passive Optical Network (PON) deployments have recently been aiming to combine the capacity of metro and access networks in the last mile of the Internet service provisioning. Deployment of PONs by running fiber to the premises introduces the advantage of huge capacity but at the same time, it calls for a robust design in order to avoid long service outage durations in case of network failures where survivable network design is mostly limited to the deployment budget. In this paper, we propose three mixed integer linear programming (MILP) models for various survivability policies to deploy reliable long-reach PONs under the budget limitations. Each MILP model aims to place the ONUs in optimal locations so that the covered area is maximized while availability requirements of the users are satisfied within the deployment budget. We solve the MILP models under the uniform and heterogeneous availability requirement scenarios and show that service availability and coverage introduce a trade-off so as the coverage and deployment cost do. Two out of the three survivability policies can guarantee 99.99% service availability while the third one is able to guarantee 99.999% by running the proposed MILP models. However, the first two schemes are able to cover larger area when compared to the third scheme which is the most reliable protection policy.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".