MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2164485427 · doi:10.1109/mnet.2007.334311

Video-on-Demand Networks: Design Approaches and Future Challenges

2007· article· en· W2164485427 on OpenAlexaff
Frederic Thouin, Mark Coates

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Network · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicPeer-to-Peer Network Technologies
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceScope (computer science)Video on demandPeer-to-peerOn demandScalabilityNetwork planning and designSystems designTelecommunicationsComputer networkMultimedia

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

IP network based deployments of interactive video-on-demand (VoD) systems are today very limited in scope, but there is a strong belief among telecommunication companies that this market will expand exponentially in the next few years. In this article, we outline the components of VoD architectures and survey the current approaches to their design. We strive to identify the research challenges that must be addressed in the development of design tools that can determine how to expand upon an existing network infrastructure to support video-on-demand. The long tail of content and extensive growth in usage are expected to have a major impact on the streaming and storage requirements of such systems. Hybrid VoD architectures that incorporate peer-to-peer exchange are an extremely promising paradigm, but there are many challenges in developing operational and economically feasible peer-to-peer systems. VoD networks generate sufficient traffic that their impact should be considered in planning general network infrastructure expansions

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)0.003
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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0040.005
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.053
GPT teacher head0.241
Teacher spread0.188 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations87
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE NetworkSame topicPeer-to-Peer Network TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207