MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2153905372 · doi:10.1109/pacrim.1997.620323

Early fault detection in cable television networks (the case of the reverse pilot)

2002· article· en· W2153905372 on OpenAlexaff
N.P. Kourounakis, S. Neville, N.J. Dimopoulos

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicOptical Network Technologies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Victoria
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFault (geology)Computer scienceAmplifierCable televisionPath (computing)Upstream (networking)Real-time computingComputer networkTelecommunicationsBandwidth (computing)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this work, we present a model based method for reliably detecting reverse pilot faults within cable amplifier networks. This method has the advantage over traditional fixed bound fault detection techniques in that it is able to compensate for changes in the environmental conditions and, hence, reduce the occurrence of false alarms. Cable television distribution networks are used to distribute cable signals from a centrally located injection site (head-end), to subscribers' homes. Typically cable amplifier plants are two way asymmetrical communication networks. The downstream path, from the head-end to the subscribers' homes, is used mainly for delivering cable television services. Traditionally, the upstream path has been used to transmit the status data from the trunk amplifiers to the head-end. More recently it is used to provide a data path from the subscribers to the head-end for use in interactive services. Hence the ability to detect the occurrence of faults in the reverse path is quite important. We have implemented a general approach based on using a back propagation neural network to model the dynamics of the reverse pilot of cable television amplifiers. This technique was able to provide good temporal localization of the start of fault conditions and a clear indication of the presence of the fault through its occurrence.

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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.148
Threshold uncertainty score0.185

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.189
Teacher spread0.177 · 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

Citations3
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicOptical Network TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207