MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3009196551 · doi:10.4018/ijssci.2020010104

An Incentive Compatible Mechanism for Replica Placement in Peer-Assisted Content Distribution

2020· article· en· W3009196551 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Software Science and Computational Intelligence · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicPeer-to-Peer Network Technologies
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsReplicaComputer scienceContent deliveryIncentiveDistributed computingContent distributionLatency (audio)Key (lock)Incentive compatibilityThe InternetPeer-to-peerContent delivery networkComputer networkWorld Wide WebComputer securityTelecommunicationsServer

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Content delivery is a key technology on the Internet to achieve large scale, low-latency, reliable, and intelligent data delivery. Replica placement (RP) is a key machinery in content delivery systems to achieve efficient and effective content delivery. This work proposes a novel decentralized algorithm for the replica placement in peer-assisted content delivery networks with simultaneous considerations for peer incentives. By applying techniques from the algorithmic mechanism design theory, the authors show the incentive compatibility of the proposed algorithm. Experiments were conducted to validate the properties of the proposed method and comparisons were made with the state-of-the-art RP algorithms.

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.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.734
Threshold uncertainty score0.545

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0020.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.068
GPT teacher head0.331
Teacher spread0.263 · 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