MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2936366530 · doi:10.1109/icin.2019.8685875

Optimal Cache Budget Distribution for Hierarchical ICN Networks

2019· article· en· W2936366530 on OpenAlexaff
Alireza Montazeri, Dwight Makaroff

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicCaching and Content Delivery
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCacheComputer scienceNetwork topologyComputer networkLocalityInformation-centric networkingSmart CacheCache algorithmsFalse sharingDistributed computingPath (computing)CPU cache

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Caching facilities can be deployed by all or some of the ICN nodes on the path of delivering data items from a content source to users. However, some inconsistent conclusions have been made from different studies regarding the benefits of in-network caching. To investigate the benefits of in-network caching, we propose an analytical model that optimally distributes a total cache budget among the nodes of a given ICN network in an environment that does not follow the Independent Reference Model (IRM).The cache budget distribution problem is studied with respect to optimizing system-centric and user-centric metrics, using a small number of synthetic and realistic topologies as case studies. Our findings reveal the benefits of in-network caching as well as the optimal distribution of the cache budget in ICNs with respect to our selected objective function. Although the efficiency of in-network caching on user-centric metrics strongly depends on topologies and the strength of temporal locality, in-network caching is very helpful in optimizing the ISP-centric metrics for all network and traffic settings.

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)0.006
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 score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.034

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.221
Teacher spread0.211 · 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 topicCaching and Content DeliveryFrench-language works237,207