MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3009424282 · doi:10.1145/1384529.1375492

Analysis of bittorrent-like protocols for on-demand stored media streaming

2008· article· en· W3009424282 on OpenAlexaff
Nadim Parvez, Carey Williamson, Anirban Mahanti, Niklas Carlsson

Bibliographic record

VenueACM SIGMETRICS Performance Evaluation Review · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicPeer-to-Peer Network Technologies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of SaskatchewanUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBitTorrentComputer scienceUploadDownloadBandwidth (computing)Peer-to-peerOn demandComputer networkDistributed computingMultimediaWorld Wide Web

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper develops analytic models that characterize the behavior of on-demand stored media content delivery using BitTorrent-like protocols. The models capture the effects of different piece selection policies, including Rarest-First and two variants of In-Order. Our models provide insight into transient and steady-state system behavior, and help explain the sluggishness of the system with strict In-Order streaming. We use the models to compare different retrieval policies across a wide range of system parameters, including peer arrival rate, upload/download bandwidth, and seed residence time. We also provide quantitative results on the startup delays and retrieval times for streaming media delivery. Our results provide insights into the optimal design of peer-to-peer networks for on-demand media streaming.

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)0.014
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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.021

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.014
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
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 head0.146
GPT teacher head0.379
Teacher spread0.233 · 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

Citations22
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueACM SIGMETRICS Performance Evaluation ReviewSame topicPeer-to-Peer Network TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207