EAGLE: Heterogeneous GNN-based Network Performance Analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Performance analysis is of great importance for management and optimization of space-terrestrial integrated networks (STINs). Traditional approaches to network performance analysis are often based on idealized assumptions that are deviated from the real network environment. This leads to the fact that these models are usually inefficient and restricted in real-world STINs with complicated behavior and even dynamic capacity. In this paper, we propose a network performance analysis approach EAGLE based on heterogeneous graph neural networks. Firstly, we propose a powerful computer network representation model that can preserve all of the information in computer networks. It represents different components of computer networks as a set of heterogeneous nodes and edges, and finally constructs a heterogeneous graph. Then, we obtain the topological representation for the routers in the network through a bandwidth-aware network embedding model. Based on this heterogeneous graph, we propose a heterogeneous GNN model to accurately predict network KPIs because it can completely capture the rich topological and attribute information of computer networks. Experimental results demonstrate that EAGLE can accurately model different networks, and outperforms both traditional methods and the latest neural network-based methods.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".