MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4404787656 · doi:10.1109/lnet.2024.3507792

Latency Bounds for TSN Scheduling in the Presence of Clock Synchronization

2024· article· en· W4404787656 on OpenAlexafffund
Aviroop Ghosh, Saleh Yousefi, Thomas Kunz

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Networking Letters · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicNetwork Time Synchronization Technologies
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsLatency (audio)Computer scienceClock synchronizationScheduling (production processes)Synchronization (alternating current)Parallel computingReal-time computingComputer networkMathematicsTelecommunicationsMathematical optimization

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The IEEE 802.1Qbv (80.21Qbv) standard is designed for traffic requiring deterministic and bounded latencies through strict periodic time synchronization, as specified by IEEE 802.1AS standard. However, internal clock drift in devices causes timing misalignment, introducing further challenges to 802.1Qbv scheduling. Existing solutions, using either complex optimization approaches or non-trivial scheduling heuristics, address this by scheduling frame transmissions only once they are guaranteed to have been fully received, even in the presence of clock drifts. However, this approach introduces additional delays that can impact deadline requirements. This letter analytically derives tight end-to-end latency bounds, allowing us to determine if stream deadlines for a given network will be violated without the need to solve for any scheduling algorithms. It also proposes an approach that results in tighter bounds based on information collected from the synchronization process. The analytical results are compared with simulation results, confirming their validity.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.026
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.033

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.026
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.004
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.251
Teacher spread0.234 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations1
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Networking LettersSame topicNetwork Time Synchronization TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207