MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2926906848 · doi:10.1109/jsyst.2019.2903819

Fair Congestion Control Protocol for Data Center Bridging

2019· article· en· W2926906848 on OpenAlexaff
Mahmoud Bahnasy, Halima Elbiaze

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Systems Journal · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicNetwork Traffic and Congestion Control
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à MontréalÉcole de Technologie Supérieure
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceComputer networkNetwork congestionData centerBridging (networking)Network packetDistributed computingPacket lossEthernetLatency (audio)Cloud computingActive queue managementScalabilityOperating system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Data center networking brought a new era of data-intensive applications such as remote direct memory access, high-performance computing, and cloud computing, which raise new challenges for network researchers. Such applications require minimum network latency, no packet loss, and fairness between flows. Therefore, IEEE Data Center Bridging Task Group presents several enhancements for Ethernet networks to fulfill these requirements. In this context, we investigate the possibility of achieving dropless Ethernet. We extend our previously proposed congestion control protocol, named Heterogeneous Flow (HetFlow), to achieve minimum queue length and consequently minimum network latency. In addition, we present a mathematical model, stability analysis, and scalability study of the proposed protocol. Further, extensive simulation experiments are conducted to verify our mathematical analysis. Moreover, it is illustrated by simulations that HetFlow improves fairness between flows of different packet sizes and different round trip times.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.017

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.040
GPT teacher head0.300
Teacher spread0.260 · 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

Citations3
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Systems JournalSame topicNetwork Traffic and Congestion ControlFrench-language works237,207