Proceedings of the 2010 ACM workshop on Advanced video streaming techniques for peer-to-peer networks and social networking
Bibliographic record
Abstract
It is our great pleasure to welcome you to the 2010 ACM Workshop on Advanced Video Streaming Techniques for Peer-to-Peer Networks and Social Networking, held within ACM Multimedia 2010, in Florence, Italy. The call for papers attracted 30 submissions (two redirected from the main conference) from Australia, Asia, Canada, Europe, and the United States of America. The program committee accepted 15 papers covering a variety of topics, all in the context of peer-to-peer: Multi-source video distribution; modeling end-to-end delay; piece-picking for layered/scalable content; prefetching and upload strategies; QoE improvements for multiple description video transmission; cache optimization; network coding improving packet jitter; analytical approach to model adaptive video streaming; access control to BitTorrent swarms; group communication with layer-aware FEC; streaming with LT codes; design and evaluation of an optimized overlay topology; APIs and library. Furthermore, George Wright (Head of Prototyping, BBC Research and Development) provides an invited talk entitled Audio/visual content and metadata delivered over the open Internet using P2P-Next: some experiences from a broadcaster's perspective.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".