MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2545870575 · doi:10.1109/icspc.2007.4728555

State Management in Large Scale Group Communication

2007· article· en· W2545870575 on OpenAlexaff
Dewan Tanvir Ahmed, Shervin Shirmohammadi, Jauvane C. de Oliveira

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicPeer-to-Peer Network Technologies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBottleneckScalabilityComputer scienceDistributed computingPosition (finance)Position paperProtocol (science)Computer networkOperating systemEmbedded systemWorld Wide Web

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Current state management practices heavily rely on centralized architectures that pose scalability bottleneck and are expensive to adopt and deploy. In this paper, large scale state management issues are considered and addressed from design perspectives. The intra zonal communication strategies presented in [2][5] assume that peer knows its position in the global coordinate system. In this work, we drop that assumption and approximate peer position through the relative end-to-end delay with respect to landmarks. The technical analysis presented in [4] shows that the protocol has higher diameter in terms of hop distance compared to NICE [6], although it has lower diameter in terms of end-toend delay among the peers. To address that problem we present multiphase mesh construction technique that requires further partitioning of each region into several sub-regions. Both server-side and client-side resources are effectively utilized in collaborative manner while respecting their roles in the system.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.004
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.258
Teacher spread0.247 · 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
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

Citations1
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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