MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2899220013 · doi:10.1109/jlt.2018.2873161

Integrating Fog With Long-Reach PONs From a Dynamic Bandwidth Allocation Perspective

2018· article· en· W2899220013 on OpenAlexaff
Ahmed Helmy, Amiya Nayak

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Lightwave Technology · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicIoT and Edge/Fog Computing
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPassive optical networkDynamic bandwidth allocationComputer scienceComputer networkAccess networkCloudlet10G-PONBandwidth allocationBandwidth (computing)Edge computingCloud computingUpstream (networking)Enhanced Data Rates for GSM EvolutionDistributed computingTelecommunicationsWavelength-division multiplexing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Integrating fog computing with optical access networks is believed to form a highly capable fronthaul that will live up to the various requirements and challenges of tomorrow's access networks. Such integration combines the high capacity of optical fiber with closer-to-the-edge computing and storage capabilities. However, because optical access networks were not originally designed to carry offloaded traffic nor support edge-to-edge communications, the network architecture and employed bandwidth allocation both need to be reconsidered in this new setting. In this paper, we study the offloading performance in a long-reach optical access network when the underlying bandwidth allocation is either centralized or decentralized. We investigate how offloading can be supported in each paradigm and develop an analytical framework that is tested against numerical results. The effect of offloading on regular upstream traffic is also examined as well as the effects of cloudlet placements and network extension on the offloading performance.

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 score0.550
Threshold uncertainty score0.489

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.250
Teacher spread0.244 · 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

Citations12
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Lightwave TechnologySame topicIoT and Edge/Fog ComputingFrench-language works237,207