MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2156865683 · doi:10.1504/ijipt.2005.007555

Traffic driven multiple constraint-optimisation for QoS routing

2005· article· en· W2156865683 on OpenAlexaff
Wayne Goodridge, William Robertson, William Phillips, S. Sivakumar

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Internet Protocol Technology · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicNetwork Traffic and Congestion Control
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceQuality of serviceRouting (electronic design automation)Constraint (computer-aided design)Mathematical optimizationPath (computing)Distributed computingComputer networkMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The core of any QoS routing algorithm designed to solve the multi-constrained optimal path problem, is a length function that is used to find the optimal route across the network. User applications require diverse optimisation requirements but typical QoS-based algorithms have fixed length functions and do not offer a flexible optimisation framework. In this paper, we present a multiple-constraint-optimisation algorithm that adapts to user traffic optimisation needs without requiring a change to core logic or the length function. This routing paradigm searches for feasible paths satisfying multiple QoS requirements and implements a routing decision support system (RDSS) that separates the constraint path finding mechanism from the optimisation mechanism. Thereby the algorithm can optimise for any type or combination of metrics. Simulations compare the performance of the RDSS algorithm with other QoS algorithms and demonstrate the feasibility of the proposed approach in finding pareto optimal paths especially under strict constraints.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.289
Teacher spread0.274 · 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 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

Citations5
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Internet Protocol TechnologySame topicNetwork Traffic and Congestion ControlFrench-language works237,207