Linear Coded Caching Scheme for Centralized Networks
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Coded caching systems have been widely studied to reduce the data transmission during the peak traffic time. In practice, two important parameters of a coded caching system should be considered, i.e., the rate which is the maximum amount of the data transmission during the peak traffic time, and the subpacketization level, the number of divided packets of each file when we implement a coded caching scheme. We prefer to design a scheme with rate and packet number as small as possible since they reflect the transmission efficiency and complexity of the caching scheme, respectively. In this paper, we first characterize a coded caching scheme from the viewpoint of linear algebra and show that designing a linear coded caching scheme is equivalent to constructing three classes of matrices satisfying some rank conditions. Then based on the invariant linear subspaces and combinatorial design theory, several classes of new coded caching schemes over $\mathbb{F}_2$ are obtained by constructing these three classes of matrices. It turns out that the rate of our new rate is the same as the scheme construct by Yan et al. (IEEE Trans. Inf. Theory 63, 5821-5833, 2017), but the packet number is significantly reduced. A concatenating construction then is used for flexible number of users. Finally by means of these matrices, we show that the minimum storage regenerating codes can also be used to construct coded caching schemes.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".