Distributed Rate Allocation for Inelastic Flows
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A common assumption behind most of the recent research on network rate allocation is that traffic flows are elastic, which means that their utility functions are concave and continuous and that there is no hard limit on the rate allocated to each flow. These critical assumptions lead to the tractability of the analytic models for rate allocation based on network utility maximization, but also limit the applicability of the resulting rate allocation protocols. This paper focuses on inelastic flows and removes these restrictive and often invalid assumptions. First, we consider nonconcave utility functions, which turn utility maximization into difficult, nonconvex optimization problems. We present conditions under which the standard price-based distributed algorithm can still converge to the globally optimal rate allocation despite nonconcavity of utility functions. In particular, continuity of price-based rate allocation at all the optimal prices is a sufficient condition for global convergence of rate allocation by the standard algorithm, and continuity at at least one optimal price is a necessary condition. We then show how to provision link capacity to guarantee convergence of the standard distributed algorithm. Second, we model real-time flow utilities as discontinuous functions. We show how link capacity can be provisioned to allow admission of all real-time flows, then propose a price-based admission control heuristics when such link capacity provisioning is impossible, and finally develop an optimal distributed algorithm to allocate rates between elastic and real-time flows.
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 | 0.003 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".