MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2969357591 · doi:10.1145/3340242

Scheduling for Optimal File-Transfer Delay using Chunked Random Linear Network Coding Broadcast

2019· article· en· W2969357591 on OpenAlexaff
Emmanouil Skevakis, Ioannis Lambadaris, Hassan Halabian

Bibliographic record

VenueACM Transactions on Modeling and Performance Evaluation of Computing Systems · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicCooperative Communication and Network Coding
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceLinear network codingNetwork packetFile transferScheduling (production processes)QueueCoding (social sciences)Decoding methodsRandom accessSliding window protocolComputer networkAlgorithmTransfer (computing)Parallel computingMathematical optimizationMathematicsWindow (computing)Operating system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We study the broadcast transmission of a single file to an arbitrary number of receivers using Random Linear Network Coding (RLNC) in a network with unreliable channels. Due to the increased computational complexity of the decoding process (especially for large files), we apply chunked RLNC (i.e., RLNC is applied within non-overlapping subsets of the file). In our work, we show the optimality of the Least Received (LR) batch scheduling policy with regards to the expected file transfer completion time. The LR policy strives to keep the receiver queues balanced . This is done by transmitting packets (corresponding to encoded batches) that are needed by the receivers with the shortest queues of successfully received packets. Furthermore, we provide formulas for the expected time for the file transmission to all receivers using the LR batch scheduling policy and the minimum achievable coding window size in the case of a pre-defined delay constraint. Moreover, we evaluate through simulations a modification of the LR policy in a more realistic system setting with reduced feedback from the receivers. Finally, we provide an initial analysis and further modifications to the LR policy for time-correlated channels and asymmetric channels.

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)0.009
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 score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.018

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
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 head0.096
GPT teacher head0.327
Teacher spread0.232 · 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

Citations1
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueACM Transactions on Modeling and Performance Evaluation of Computing SystemsSame topicCooperative Communication and Network CodingFrench-language works237,207