MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2547323896 · doi:10.1109/honet.2012.6421450

Design considerations for energy-efficient Multi-Granular Optical Networks

2012· article· en· W2547323896 on OpenAlexaff
Nabil Naas, Burak Kantarcı, Hussein T. Mouftah

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced Optical Network Technologies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsScalabilityComputer scienceBandwidth (computing)Traffic groomingComputer networkEnergy consumptionRouting (electronic design automation)HeuristicThe InternetBackbone networkRouting and wavelength assignmentTransmission (telecommunications)Wavelength-division multiplexingPower consumptionNetwork planning and designDistributed computingPower (physics)TelecommunicationsWavelengthElectrical engineeringEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Multi-Granular Optical Networks (MG-ONs) offer enhanced bandwidth utilization, reduced transmission cost and increased scalability in the optical Internet backbone. There have been several proposals for optimized design of MG-ONs as power consumption in the Internet backbone has recently become an important concern. Although recent research has shown that multi-granular switching concept can guarantee energy savings when compared to the traditional traffic grooming, MG-ON design still calls for legitimate and self-contained design specifications. In this paper, we revisit the Routing and MultiGranular Path Assignment (RMGPA) problem by having the objective of minimized power consumption. Heuristic solutions of RMGPA problem show that crucial power and cost savings can be achieved with the proper selection of the wavelength capacity, waveband size and number of wavebands per fiber with a certain fiber capacity.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
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 head0.036
GPT teacher head0.247
Teacher spread0.211 · 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 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

Citations8
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAdvanced Optical Network TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207