LRED: A Robust and Responsive AQM Algorithm Using Packet Loss Ratio Measurement
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Active queue management (AQM) is an effective means to enhance congestion control, and to achieve trade-off between link utilization and delay. The de facto standard, random early detection (RED), and many of its variants employ queue length as a congestion indicator to trigger packet dropping. Despite their simplicity, these approaches often suffer from unstable behaviors in a dynamic network. Adaptive parameter settings, though might solve the problem, remain difficult in such a complex system. Recent proposals based on analytical TCP control and AQM models suggest the use of both queue length and traffic input rate as congestion indicators, which effectively enhances stability. Their response time generally increases however, leading to frequent buffer overflow and emptiness. In this paper, we propose a novel AQM algorithm that achieves fast response time and yet good robustness. The algorithm, called Loss Ratio-based RED (LRED), measures the latest packet loss ratio, and uses it as a complement to queue length for adaptively adjusting the packet drop probability. We develop an analytical model for LRED, which demonstrates that LRED is responsive even if the number of TCP flows and their persisting times vary significantly. It also provides a general guideline for the parameter settings in LRED. The performance of LRED is further examined under various simulated network environments, and compared to existing AQM algorithms. Our simulation results show that, with comparable complexities, LRED achieves shorter response time and higher robustness. More importantly, it trades off the goodput with queue length better than existing algorithms, enabling flexible system configurations
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 | 0.005 |
| 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 | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".