ProbD: Faulty Path Detection Based on Probability in Software-Defined Networking
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
With the increasing number of switches in Software-Defined Networking (SDN), there are more and more faults rising in the data plane. However, due to the existence of link redundancy and multi-path forwarding mechanisms, these problems cannot be detected in time. The current faulty path detection mechanisms have problems such as the large scale of detection and low efficiency, which is difficult to meet the requirements of efficient faulty path detection in large-scale SDN. Concerning this issue, we propose an efficient network path fault testing model ProbD based on probability detection. This model achieves a high probability of detecting arbitrary path fault in the form of small-scale random sampling. Under a certain path fault rate, ProbD obtains the curve of sample size and probability of detecting arbitrary path fault by randomly sampling network paths several times. After a small number of experiments, the ProbD model can correctly estimate the path fault rate of the network and calculate the total number of paths that need to be detected according to the different probability of detecting arbitrary path fault and the path fault rate of the network. The final experimental results show that, compared with the full path coverage test, the ProbD model based on probability detection can achieve efficient network testing with less overhead. Besides, the larger the network scale is, the more overhead will be saved.
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.
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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it