MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4384282802 · doi:10.1364/jocn.486838

Robust traffic grooming and infrastructure placement in OTN-over-DWDM networks

2023· article· en· W4384282802 on OpenAlexaff
Dimitrios Michael Manias, Joe Naoum‐Sawaya, Abdallah Shami, Abbas Javadtalab, Mahdi Hemmati, Yuren You

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Optical Communications and Networking · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced Optical Network Technologies
Canadian institutionsHuawei Technologies (Canada)Western University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTraffic groomingScalabilityComputer scienceWavelength-division multiplexingComputer networkHeuristicOptical networkingOptimization problemBackbone networkDistributed computingWavelength

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The advent of next-generation networks has revolutionized modern networking practices through its improved service capability as well as its numerous emerging use cases. Coupled with the increasing number of connected devices, 5G and beyond (5G+) network traffic is expected to be increasingly diverse and high in volume. To address the large amount of data exchanged between the 5G+ core and external data networks, optical transport networks (OTNs) with dense wavelength-division multiplexing (DWDM) will be leveraged. In order to prepare for this increase in traffic, network operators (NOs) must develop and expand their existing backbone networks, requiring significant levels of capital expenditures. To this end, the traffic grooming and infrastructure placement problem is critical to supporting NO decisions. The work presented in this paper considers the traffic grooming and infrastructure placement problem for OTN-over-DWDM networks. The dynamicity and diversity of 5G+ network traffic are addressed through the use of robust optimization, allowing for increasing levels of solution conservativeness to protect against various levels of demand uncertainty. Furthermore, a robust traffic grooming and infrastructure placement heuristic (RGIP-H) solution capable of addressing the scalability concerns of the optimization problem formulation is presented. The results presented in this work demonstrate how the tuning of the robust parameters affects the cost of the objective function. Additionally, the ability of the robust solution to protect the solution under demand uncertainty is highlighted when the robust and deterministic solutions are compared during parameter deviation trials. Finally, the performance of the RGIP-H is compared to the optimization models when applied to larger network sizes.

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 score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.252
Teacher spread0.226 · 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
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Optical Communications and NetworkingSame topicAdvanced Optical Network TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207