MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2156260722 · doi:10.1109/jsac.2007.071205

R2: Random Push with Random Network Coding in Live Peer-to-Peer Streaming

2007· article· en· W2156260722 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Journal on Selected Areas in Communications · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicCooperative Communication and Network Coding
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceUploadLinear network codingTestbedComputer networkServerPeer-to-peerMulticastBitTorrentWorld Wide WebNetwork packet

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In information theory, it has been shown that network coding can effectively improve the throughput of multicast communication sessions in directed acyclic graphs. More practically, random network coding is also instrumental towards improving the downloading performance in BitTorrent-like peer-to-peer content distribution sessions. Live peer-to-peer streaming, however, poses unique challenges to the use of network coding, due to its strict timing and bandwidth constraints. In this paper, we revisit the complete spectrum in the design space of live peer-to-peer streaming protocols, with a sole objective of taking full advantage of random network coding. We present R <sup xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">2</sup> , our new streaming algorithm designed from scratch to incorporate random network coding with a randomized push algorithm. R <sup xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">2</sup> is designed to improve the performance of live streaming in terms of initial buffering delays, resilience to peer dynamics, as well as reduced bandwidth costs on dedicated streaming servers, all of which are beyond the basic requirement of stable streaming playback. On an experimental testbed consisting of dozens of dual-CPU cluster servers, we thoroughly evaluate R <sup xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">2</sup> with an actual implementation, real network traffic, and emulated peer upload capacities, in comparisons with a typical live streaming protocol (both without and with network coding), representing the current state-of-the-art in real-world streaming applications.

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.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.801
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.004
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0040.000
Research integrity0.0000.002
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 head0.038
GPT teacher head0.310
Teacher spread0.272 · 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