MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2904196244 · doi:10.1109/mass.2018.00039

Randomized Single-Path Flow Routing on SDN-Aware Wi-Fi Mesh Networks

2018· article· en· W2904196244 on OpenAlexafffund
Dawood Sajjadi, Zehui Zheng, Rukhsana Ruby, Jianping Pan

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicSoftware-Defined Networks and 5G
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Victoria
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsComputer scienceComputer networkWireless mesh networkDistributed computingLink-state routing protocolDynamic Source RoutingEqual-cost multi-path routingMultipath routingStatic routingTestbedWireless Routing ProtocolRouting protocolBackhaul (telecommunications)Network packetWireless networkWirelessTelecommunicationsBase station

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Wi-Fi Mesh Networks (WMNs) as a popular platform can be used for the construction of dynamic backhaul networks especially over small cells, which is an indispensable part of the 5G technology. Finding the optimal single-path flow routing solution over the multi-hop backhaul networks is a classic NP-hard problem and there are non-trivial drawbacks such as packet re-ordering to implement multi-path routing as a practical solution. However, Software Defined Networking (SDN) as an emerging paradigm can provide a great opportunity to implement fast and efficient solutions for routing the network flows over WMNs. In this paper, we propose a randomized single-path flow routing that can be applied to SDN-aware WMNs. The randomized nature of our introduced solution avoids the complexities of implementing a multi-path flow routing and it presents a viable routing scheme that guarantees certain performance bounds. In addition, it considers the key characteristics of wireless networks and it can be employed for multi-channel multi-radio WMNs. Through numerical results, we have shown that our solution follows the theoretical, tighter and more general performance bounds. Moreover, in contrast to most of the prior studies, the performance of the proposed solution is not only evaluated through a real testbed (in terms of the aggregated throughput and protocol overhead) but also compared with some of the most popular WMN routing protocols.

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)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.233
Teacher spread0.213 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations5
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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