MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2156553307 · doi:10.1109/icccn.1995.540157

A case study in local area migration to ATM

2002· article· en· W2156553307 on OpenAlexaff
V.J. Friesen, J.W. Wong

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicInterconnection Networks and Systems
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsATM adaptation layerMultiplexerComputer networkAsynchronous Transfer ModeComputer scienceLocal area networkServerBackbone networkInterconnectionDistributed computingMultiplexingTelecommunications

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Technology for local ATM is currently being offered in a number of devices, such as routers, switches, and switching hubs. These devices provide the capability for an ATM switched internetwork. In general, a switched internetwork consists of an ATM backbone and a number of hubs. The hubs, by providing ATM adaptation functionality, serve as access points to the ATM backbone for servers and clients. The objective of our study is to evaluate alternative strategies for migrating towards an ATM switched internetwork. Our investigation is based on a local area network providing interconnection for a group of clients and servers in a campus environment. A number of different configurations may, at various stages of migration, comprise the interconnection media for this local area network. The network components that are considered in this migration process are Ethernets, both shared and dedicated, multiplexers, hubs, ATM switches, and ATM-equipped end devices. A simulation model is developed to study the performance of the different configurations. Simulation results for end-to-end delay and loss are presented for each alternative configuration.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Case report · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.023

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0040.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.051
GPT teacher head0.254
Teacher spread0.203 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designCase report
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

Citations0
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicInterconnection Networks and SystemsFrench-language works237,207