MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4206373853 · doi:10.1109/jlt.2021.3134098

Extraction and Early Detection of Anomalies in Lightpath SNR Using Machine Learning Models

2021· article· en· W4206373853 on OpenAlexafffund
Stéphanie Allogba, Banti Laure M. Yameogo, Christine Tremblay

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Lightwave Technology · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicOptical Network Technologies
Canadian institutionsÉcole de Technologie Supérieure
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsSupport vector machineComputer scienceArtificial intelligenceFeature extractionRandom forestResidualMachine learningContext (archaeology)Data miningAlgorithm

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In a context of ever-increasing traffic, a degradation of the optical layer could affect client demands, in particular the quality of service provided by telecommunications operators. Thus, the rapid detection and prediction of performance degradations occurring in the optical lightpath could help to minimize errors in the network. This paper proposes a failure detection model, equivalent to a performance degradation detection model, but based on machine learning (ML) techniques, namely, the interquartile range (IQR) and the support vector machine (SVM) methods. Note that this model is built from performance metrics monitored on real optical lightpaths. In addition, our model can both label the anomalies to be defined on the data and capture the features that will be used. Feature engineering is explored using three ML techniques, namely the Boruta algorithm, the Random Forest classifier and the recursive feature elimination (RFE), to select the most useful features for the implementation of the model. Tested on monitored performance metrics, the validation phase shows that the model using the RFE method gives us the best results with an F1-score and a recall of 99.51% and 100%, respectively. These results prove the model's ability to detect in advance the degradation of the performance of the 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 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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.239
Threshold uncertainty score0.467

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.223
Teacher spread0.206 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations10
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Lightwave TechnologySame topicOptical Network TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207