MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

An Empirical Study on Internet Traffic Prediction Using Statistical Rolling Model

2022· article· en· W4285813782 on OpenAlexaff
Sajal Saha, Anwar Haque, Greg Sidebottom

Bibliographic record

Venue2022 International Wireless Communications and Mobile Computing (IWCMC) · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicTraffic Prediction and Management Techniques
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAutoregressive integrated moving averageExponential smoothingMean absolute percentage errorAkaike information criterionComputer scienceInternet trafficMean squared prediction errorData miningThe InternetStatisticsTime seriesArtificial neural networkMachine learningMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Real-world IP network traffic is susceptible to exter-nal and internal factors such as new internet service integration, traffic migration, internet application, etc. Due to these factors, the actual internet traffic is non-linear and challenging to analyze using a statistical model for future prediction. In this paper, we investigated and evaluated the performance of different statistical prediction models for real IP network traffic; and showed a significant improvement in prediction using the rolling prediction technique. Initially, a set of best hyper-parameters for the corresponding prediction model is identified by analyzing the traffic characteristics and implementing a grid search algorithm based on the minimum Akaike Information Criterion (AIC). Then, we performed a comparative performance analysis among AutoRegressive Integrated Moving Average (ARIMA), Seasonal ARIMA (SARIMA), SARIMA with eXogenous factors (SARIMAX), and Holt-Winter for single-step prediction. The seasonality of our traffic has been explicitly modeled using SARIMA, which reduces the rolling prediction Mean Average Percentage Error (MAPE) by more than 4% compared to ARIMA (incapable of handling the seasonality). We further improved traffic prediction using SARIMAX to learn different exogenous factors extracted from the original traffic, which yielded the best rolling prediction results with a MAPE of 6.83%. Finally, we applied the exponential smoothing technique to handle the variability in traffic following the Holt-Winter model, which exhibited a better prediction than ARIMA (around 1.5% less MAPE). The rolling prediction technique reduced prediction error using real Internet Service Provider (ISP) traffic data by more than 50% compared to the standard prediction method.

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: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.266
Threshold uncertainty score0.804

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.325
Teacher spread0.290 · 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
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

Citations12
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venue2022 International Wireless Communications and Mobile Computing (IWCMC)Same topicTraffic Prediction and Management TechniquesFrench-language works237,207