MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2917039271 · doi:10.1109/glocom.2018.8647885

Towards Green Fog-LR-PON Integration for Wireless Backhauls

2018· article· en· W2917039271 on OpenAlexaff
Ahmed Helmy, Amiya Nayak

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicIoT and Edge/Fog Computing
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBackhaul (telecommunications)Computer scienceComputer networkPassive optical networkBandwidth (computing)Access networkDynamic bandwidth allocationSleep modeEdge device10G-PONEfficient energy useEnergy consumptionBandwidth allocationPower consumptionPower (physics)Cloud computingEngineeringWavelength-division multiplexingBase stationElectrical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Integrating optical access networks with fog computing combines the high capacity of optical fiber with closer-to-the-edge computing and storage capabilities. Such integration is believed to form a highly capable backhaul that will alleviate network congestions, serve local demands with less energy consumption, and live up to the requirements of tomorrow's access networks and application requirements. This integration however requires reexamining the bandwidth allocation in addition to reconsidering the network architecture itself, which was not designed to support direct edge-to-edge communications. Moreover, the growing demands for energy-efficient access networks also add the requirement for sleep-aware bandwidth allocation and a power-conserving framework. In this paper, we study the offloading performance in a long-reach passive optical network (LR-PON) when the underlying bandwidth allocation is either centralized or decentralized. Moreover, we investigate how offloading can be supported in each paradigm when optical network units (ONUs) go through a cyclic sleep-mode to conserve energy. We consider this paper to be one of the first to look into integrating fog with LR-PONs under a power-conserving framework and examine which allocation paradigm would be fit to carry offloaded traffic with better network performance and energy-efficiency within this new setting.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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 communication0.0010.001
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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.281
Teacher spread0.251 · 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

Citations0
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicIoT and Edge/Fog ComputingFrench-language works237,207