MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Automated Design of Network Services from Network Service Requirements

2020· article· en· W3015736758 on OpenAlexaff
Navid Nazarzadeoghaz, Ferhat Khendek, Maria Toeroe

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicSoftware-Defined Networks and 5G
Canadian institutionsEricsson (Canada)Concordia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceVirtual networkProvisioningOrchestrationSoftware deploymentNetwork Functions VirtualizationService (business)Function (biology)AbstractionSet (abstract data type)Computer networkOntologyNetwork serviceFunctional requirementDistributed computingSoftware engineeringOperating systemCloud computing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The ETSI Network Function Virtualization (NFV) has defined the NFV Management and Orchestration (NFV-MANO) framework and a set of concepts for the rapid provisioning, deployment, and management of Network Services (NSs). To do so the NFV-MANO expects as input a description of the NS. Thus, one has to come up with the design of the NS and its descriptor, which contains all the details required for the deployment and management of the NS. In this paper, we propose an approach for automating the design of NSs. The approach starts with NS Requirements (NSReq) - an intent that describes the requested service at a high level of abstraction focusing on its functional, non-functional and/or architectural characteristics. With the help of a Network Function (NF) ontology, which captures the knowledge about NSs, NFs and their relations from past designs and possibly standards, we transform the NSReq through successive steps to a level where Virtual Network Functions (VNFs) can be selected from a VNF catalog and put together in VNF Forwarding Graphs (VNFFGs) to form a NS, which is then dimensioned and tailored according to the non-functional requirements.

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 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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.487
Threshold uncertainty score0.830

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
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 head0.044
GPT teacher head0.246
Teacher spread0.202 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations11
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicSoftware-Defined Networks and 5GFrench-language works237,207