MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4297818342 · doi:10.1109/dcoss54816.2022.00066

GNN-based End-to-end Delay Prediction in Software Defined Networking

2022· article· en· W4297818342 on OpenAlexaff
Zhun Ge, Jiacheng Hou, Amiya Nayak

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicSoftware-Defined Networks and 5G
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceEnd-to-end delayEnd-to-end principleNetwork delayLatency (audio)Network packetSoftwareGraphReal-time computingComputer networkConvolutional neural networkRecurrent neural networkSoftware-defined networkingArtificial neural networkArtificial intelligenceTheoretical computer scienceTelecommunications

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In software-defined networking (SDN), predicting latency (delay) is essential for enhancing performance, power consumption and resource utilization in meeting its significant latency requirements. In this paper, we present a graph-based formulation of Abilene Network and apply a Graph Neural Network (GNN)-based model, Spatial-Temporal Graph Convolutional Network (STGCN), to predict end-to-end packet delay on this formulation. We find this model outperforms the average baseline predictor in predicting packet delay since the STGCN framework captures both spatial and temporal dimensions of the data. We also compare STGCN with other machine learning methods: Random Forest (RF) and Neural Network (NN). In the most complex network traffic condition with high traffic intensity, varying capacities and propagation delay, STGCN is 68.5% and 78.7% better than RF and NN, respectively. This illustrates the feasibility and benefits of a GNN approach in predicting end-to-end delay in software-defined networks.

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)0.002
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 score0.036
Threshold uncertainty score0.072

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.218
Teacher spread0.203 · 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

Citations15
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicSoftware-Defined Networks and 5GFrench-language works237,207