MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2949931668

Optimal Distributed Broadcasting with Per-neighbor Queues in Acyclic Overlay Networks with Arbitrary Underlay Capacity Constraints

2013· article· en· W2949931668 on OpenAlexaff
Shaoquan Zhang, Minghua Chen, Zongpeng Li, Longbo Huang

Bibliographic record

VenuearXiv (Cornell University) · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicPeer-to-Peer Network Technologies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsUnderlayComputer scienceBroadcasting (networking)OverlayDistributed computingQueueOverlay networkComputer networkConvergence (economics)The InternetTelecommunicationsSignal-to-noise ratio (imaging)
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract—Broadcasting system such as P2P streaming systems represent important network applications that support up to millions of online users. An efficient broadcasting mechanism is at the core of the system design. Despite substantial efforts on developing efficient broadcasting algorithms, the following important question remains open: How to achieve maximum broadcast rate in a distributed manner with each user maintaining information queues only for its direct neighbors? In this work, we first derive an innovative formulation of the problem over acyclic overlay networks with arbitrary underlay capacity constraints. Then, based on the formulation, we develop a distributed algorithm to achieve the maximum broadcast rate and every user only maintains one queue per-neighbor. Due to its lightweight nature, our algorithm scales very well with network size and remains robust against high system dynamics. Finally, by conducting simulations we validate the optimality of our algorithm under different network capacity models. Simulation results further indicate that the convergence time of our algorithm grows linearly with the network size, which suggests an interesting direction for future investigation. I.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.429
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.162
Teacher spread0.129 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuearXiv (Cornell University)Same topicPeer-to-Peer Network TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207