GNN-based End-to-end Delay Prediction in Software Defined Networking
Bibliographic record
Abstract
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".