MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2171629704 · doi:10.1109/lcn.2006.322217

Indicator Random Variables in Traffic Analysis and the Birthday Problem

2006· article· en· W2171629704 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

VenueConference on Local Computer Networks · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicComplex Network Analysis Techniques
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPareto principleLomax distributionRandom variablePareto interpolationPareto distributionIndependence (probability theory)Pareto analysisVariable (mathematics)Computer scienceHeavy-tailed distributionGeneralized Pareto distributionMathematicsMathematical optimizationStatisticsExtreme value theory

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper proposes using collisions of Pareto random variables in traffic analysis and in generating fictitious network traffic that follows various Pareto distributions. Pareto distributions are commonly found in network statistics, but the distributions may be truncated or overlapping, thus making it hard to estimate their sample parameters. Therefore, this paper investigates methods of computing parameters of binned collisions of Pareto random variables. This paper explores an indicator variable approach to analyzing collisions of Pareto random variables. These collisions are initially modeled by the birthday problem or paradox and then they are extended to understand independence of collisions. This paper's use of indicator variables simplifies the calculation of higher moments for binned collisions of Pareto random variables

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 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 score0.955
Threshold uncertainty score0.724

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.211
Teacher spread0.205 · 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