MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2605316234

IP Restoration vs. Optical Protection: Which One has the Least Bandwidth Requirements?

2012· article· en· W2605316234 on OpenAlexaff
Brigitte Jaumard, Minh N. Bùi, Biswanath Mukherjee, Chatanya Vadrevu

Bibliographic record

VenueLes Cahiers du GERAD · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced Optical Network Technologies
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSurvivabilityBandwidth (computing)Computer scienceComputer networkWavelength-division multiplexingData recoveryScheme (mathematics)MathematicsComputer hardware
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Survivability in IP-over-WDM networks has already been extensively discussed in a series of studies. While many studies assume an IP restoration scheme and focus on network connectivity in order to ensure proper recovery, few studies deal with optical protection. We investigate this question with the objective of estimating the respective bandwidth requirements of both recovery schemes, subject to single or multiple failures. We also design a mixed recovery scenario where the recovery is taken care at a different layer depending on the type of failures. Results shows that optical protection is by far the most economical recovery scheme in terms of bandwidth requirements.

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)0.000
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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.649
Threshold uncertainty score0.579

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.219
Teacher spread0.188 · 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 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

Citations0
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueLes Cahiers du GERADSame topicAdvanced Optical Network TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207