MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2755921607 · doi:10.1109/icccn.2017.8038524

Comparison of Virtualization Algorithms and Topologies for Data Center Networks

2017· article· en· W2755921607 on OpenAlexaff
Hanene Ben Yedder, Qingye Ding, Umme Zakia, Zhida Li, Soroush Haeri, Ljiljana Trajković

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicSoftware-Defined Networks and 5G
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNetwork virtualizationComputer scienceVirtualizationNetwork topologyDistributed computingData centerScalabilityCloud computingVirtual networkComputer networkNetwork management stationNetwork architectureOperating system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Data centers are core infrastructure of cloud computing. Network virtualization in these centers is a promising solution that enables coexistence of multiple virtual networks on a shared infrastructure. It offers flexible management, lower implementation cost, higher network scalability, increased resource utilization, and improved energy efficiency. In this paper, we consider switch-centric data center network topologies and evaluate their use for network virtualization by comparing Deterministic (D-ViNE) and Randomized (R-ViNE) Virtual Network Embedding, Global Resource Capacity (GRC), and Global Resource Capacity-Multicommodity (GRC-M) Flow algorithms.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.982
Threshold uncertainty score0.212

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 science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.127
GPT teacher head0.385
Teacher spread0.259 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations10
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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