MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2606265326 · doi:10.1109/mnet.2017.1600248

Software Defined Networking Enabled Wireless Network Virtualization: Challenges and Solutions

2017· article· en· W2606265326 on OpenAlexaff
Ning Zhang, Peng Yang, Shan Zhang, Dajiang Chen, Weihua Zhuang, Ben Liang, Xuemin Shen

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Network · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicSoftware-Defined Networks and 5G
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceResource allocationVirtualizationNetwork virtualizationComputer networkKey (lock)Agile software developmentWireless networkNetwork Functions VirtualizationSoftware-defined networkingVirtual networkResource management (computing)SlicingResource (disambiguation)WirelessDistributed computingCloud computingComputer securityTelecommunicationsWorld Wide WebSoftware engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Next generation (5G) wireless networks are expected to support massive data and accommodate a wide range of services/use cases with distinct requirements in a cost-effective, flexible, and agile manner. As a promising solution, WNV, or network slicing, enables multiple virtual networks to share a common infrastructure on demand, and to be customized for different services/use cases. This article focuses on network-wide resource allocation for realizing WNV. Specifically, the motivations, the enabling platforms, and the benefits of WNV, are first reviewed. Then, resource allocation for WNV and the technical challenges are discussed. Afterward, an SDN enabled resource allocation framework is proposed to facilitate WNV, including the key procedures and the corresponding modeling approaches. A case study is provided as an example of resource allocation in WNV. Finally, some open research topics essential to WNV are discussed.

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)0.001
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: Review · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.004
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.047
GPT teacher head0.249
Teacher spread0.202 · 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
GenreReview

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

Citations114
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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