MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2483254871

An optimal station allocation policy for tree Local Area Networks

2015· article· en· W2483254871 on OpenAlexaff
Debashis Saha, Amitava Mukherjee

Bibliographic record

VenueHrčak Portal of scientific journals of Croatia (University Computing Centre) · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced Optical Network Technologies
Canadian institutionsPricewaterhouseCoopers (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHeuristicSubgradient methodComputer scienceTree (set theory)Mathematical optimizationNetwork topologyRelaxation (psychology)Local area networkOptimization problemFacility location problemTree networkDistributed computingComputer networkMathematicsTime complexityAlgorithm
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper reports on the simulation results of a heuristic solution to the station allocation problem in a tree topology Local Area Network (LAN). A local network is a data communication network where communication remains confined within a moderate sized area, such as a plant site, an office building or a university campus. Tree LANs with collision avoidance switches and multiple broadcast facility have, recently, become popular due to their suitability for high speed light wave communications. Given a tree LAN with fanout F and given the total number of stations N to be connected, a combinatorial optimization problem arises regarding how to allocate the stations to the leaf nodes so that the total system availability (a network performance criteria) is maximized. This is known as the optimal station assignment problem. In this paper, it is formulated as a non-linear optimization problem which can be solved by the Lagrangean relaxation and the subgradient optimization techniques. A simple heuristic is developed based on these techniques. The simulation studies show that the proposed heuristic is relatively fast operating only in a subspace of the complete solution space.

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 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 score0.506
Threshold uncertainty score0.688

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 science0.0000.000
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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.252
Teacher spread0.228 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations0
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHrčak Portal of scientific journals of Croatia (University Computing Centre)Same topicAdvanced Optical Network TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207