MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2168744335 · doi:10.1109/glocom.2005.1577693

An analytical model for fair rate calculation in resilient packet rings

2005· article· en· W2168744335 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

VenueGLOBECOM '05. IEEE Global Telecommunications Conference, 2005. · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicPower Line Communications and Noise
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceNetwork packetNode (physics)Convergence (economics)ReuseUpstream (networking)Filter (signal processing)Computer networkRate of convergenceNetwork congestionFairness measureChannel (broadcasting)ThroughputWirelessTelecommunications

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Resilient packet ring (RPR) is a new medium access control (MAC) protocol for high-speed ring networks. It supports spatial reuse and, therefore, maintaining fairness among different nodes is a challenging task in RPR. To ensure fairness among nodes, a fairness algorithm is employed at each RPR node. In case of congestion, the fairness algorithm advertises a fair rate to all upstream nodes contributing to the congestion. In this paper, we develop an analytical model for fair rate calculation in the standard RPR fairness algorithm in the parking lot scenario. We first ignore the link propagation delay and model the system using a nonlinear discrete-time low-pass filter. We, then, consider the link propagation delay and develop a more realistic model. We verify our model by simulation results and analyze the effect of various parameters on the convergence time. Finally, we determine the low-pass filter coefficient to ensure that convergence time of the algorithm is within its minimum range

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.501
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0020.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.039
GPT teacher head0.314
Teacher spread0.275 · 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