MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2554124467 · doi:10.1109/netwks.2016.7751168

Adaptive consistency for distributed SDN controllers

2016· article· en· W2554124467 on OpenAlexafffund
Mohamed Aslan, Ashraf Matrawy

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicSoftware-Defined Networks and 5G
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsComputer scienceScalabilityConsistency (knowledge bases)Controller (irrigation)Distributed computingContext (archaeology)Adaptive controlSoftware-defined networkingStrong consistencyAdaptive systemControl (management)Artificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, we introduce the use of adaptive controllers into software-defined networking (SDN) and propose the use of adaptive consistency models in the context of distributed SDN controllers. These adaptive controllers can tune their own configurations in real-time in order to enhance the performance of the applications running on top of them. We expect that the use of such controllers could alleviate some of the emerging challenges in SDN that could have an impact on the performance, security, or scalability of the network. Further, we propose extending the SDN controller architecture to support adaptive consistency based on tunable consistency models. Finally, we compare the performance of a proof-of-concept distributed load-balancing application when it runs on-top of: (1) an adaptive and (2) a non-adaptive controller. Our results indicate that adaptive controllers were more resilient to sudden changes in the network conditions than the non-adaptive ones.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.014
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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.023

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.014
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.226
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

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

Citations34
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicSoftware-Defined Networks and 5GFrench-language works237,207