Machine Learning for Performance-Aware Virtual Network Function Placement
Bibliographic record
Abstract
With the growing demand for data connectivity, network service providers are faced with the task of reducing their capital and operational expenses while simultaneously improving network performance and addressing the increased connectivity demand. Although Network Function Virtualization (NFV) has been identified as a solution, several challenges must be addressed to ensure its feasibility. In this paper, we address the Virtual Network Function (VNF) placement problem by developing a machine learning decision tree model that learns from the effective placement of the various VNF instances forming a Service Function Chain (SFC). The model takes several performance-related features from the network as an input and selects the placement of the various VNF instances on network servers with the objective of minimizing the delay between dependent VNF instances. The benefits of using machine learning are realized by moving away from a complex mathematical modelling of the system and towards a data-based understanding of the system. Using the Evolved Packet Core (EPC) as a use case, we evaluate our model on different data center networks and compare it to the BACON algorithm in terms of the delay between interconnected components and the total delay across the SFC. Furthermore, a time complexity analysis is performed to show the effectiveness of the model in NFV applications.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".