MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2963067051 · doi:10.1109/comst.2014.2320096

A Survey on Network Tomography With Network Coding

2014· article· en· W2963067051 on OpenAlexaff
Peng Qin, Bin Dai, Benxiong Huang, Xu Guan, Kui Wu

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Communications Surveys & Tutorials · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicCooperative Communication and Network Coding
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Victoria
FundersNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsNetwork tomographyTomographyComputer scienceComputed tomographyNetwork topologyData miningCoding (social sciences)Artificial intelligenceTopology (electrical circuits)Machine learningAlgorithmComputer networkMathematicsMedicineStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The overhead of internal network monitoring motivates techniques of network tomography. Network coding (NC) presents a new opportunity for network tomography as NC introduces topology-dependent correlation that can be further exploited in topology estimation. Compared with traditional methods, network tomography with NC has many advantages, such as the improvement of tomography accuracy and the reduction of complexity in choosing monitoring paths. In this paper, we first introduce the problem of tomography with NC and then propose the taxonomy criteria to classify various methods. We also present existing solutions and future trend. We expect that our comprehensive review on network tomography with NC can serve as a good reference for researchers and practitioners working in the area.

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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.017

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.007
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.005
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.002

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 head0.073
GPT teacher head0.303
Teacher spread0.230 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations25
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Communications Surveys & TutorialsSame topicCooperative Communication and Network CodingFrench-language works237,207