MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4205910703 · doi:10.1109/access.2021.3138380

QoS Routing Algorithm for OBS Networks Based on a Multi-Objective Genetic Algorithm

2021· article· en· W4205910703 on OpenAlexaff
Li-Sheng Cui, Gautam Srivastava

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Access · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAI and Multimedia in Education
Canadian institutionsBrandon University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceOptical burst switchingBurst switchingComputer networkTransmission delayQuality of serviceLabel switchingCircuit switchingAlgorithmStatic routingEnd-to-end delayOptical switchRouting (electronic design automation)Network packetOptical performance monitoringRouting protocolElectronic engineeringEngineeringWavelength-division multiplexingMultiprotocol Label SwitchingMaterials science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

To optimize the QoS of optical burst switching networks, a QoS routing optimization algorithm based on a multi-objective genetic algorithm is proposed. A Bayesian network model is used to locate the fault of optical burst switching network and obtain the fault location of the transmission link of optical burst switching network; In this position, the routing optimization algorithm based on a multi-objective genetic algorithm transforms the multi constrained network quality of service routing optimization problem into a constrained multi-objective routing optimization problem. Under multiple constraints, the best path of optical burst switching network service is obtained to realize the optical burst switching network quality of service routing optimization. The results show that after applying the proposed algorithm, the average delay of video, text and picture transmission in an optical burst switching network is less than 400ms. The proposed algorithm can improve the packet delivery rate of information transmission in an optical burst switching network, reduce the transmission delay, blocking probability and use cost of an optical burst switching network, and optimize the service quality of an optical burst switching network.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.019

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.321
Teacher spread0.287 · 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

Citations11
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE AccessSame topicAI and Multimedia in EducationFrench-language works237,207