MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4214889552 · doi:10.1109/tmc.2022.3155657

Optimized Controller Provisioning in Software-Defined LEO Satellite Networks

2022· article· en· W4214889552 on OpenAlexaff
Xu Li, Feilong Tang, Luoyi Fu, Jiadi Yu, Long Chen, Jiacheng Liu, Yanmin Zhu, Laurence T. Yang

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Mobile Computing · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSatellite Communication Systems
Canadian institutionsSt. Francis Xavier University
FundersScience and Technology Commission of Shanghai MunicipalityNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsComputer scienceOverhead (engineering)Network topologyProvisioningController (irrigation)RoundingSoftware-defined networkingDistributed computingComputer networkOperating system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The controller provisioning, which adjusts the number, locations, and members of satellite controllers adaptive to the dynamic network load and topology, fundamentally impacts the performance of software-defined satellite networks (SDSNs). An ideal provisioning strategy should achieve a low total control overhead throughout the entire satellite operation period, which is extremely challenging since the network loadcan only be predicted in a short time scale. Existing methods can hardly achieve this goal for they greedily configure controllers in each time slot, where switches have to frequently migrate from one controller to another. In this paper, we focus on achievingglobally optimized strategieswith onlycurrent network load information. We first propose a comprehensive control overhead model and formulate theControllerProvisioningProblem (CPP)in SDSNs as a non-convex integer programming problem. To solve the problem, we propose an approximate algorithm named AROA by introducing a regularization framework and based on randomized rounding. We theoretically derive its competitive ratio. To produce strategies in time for future large satellite constellations, we further propose a more efficient heuristic algorithm HROA. Evaluations on our built simulation system show that our proposed methods significantly outperform related schemes in control overhead, latency, and scalability.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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 score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.025

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.228
Teacher spread0.216 · 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

Citations33
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Mobile ComputingSame topicSatellite Communication SystemsFrench-language works237,207