MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4413754767 · doi:10.1109/access.2025.3603213

LAVP: A Latency-Aware Virtual Network Function Placement Strategy for Service Function Chain in Network Function Virtualization

2025· article· en· W4413754767 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Tung Thanh Hoang, Linh Manh Pham, Hoai-Son Nguyen

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Access · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicSoftware-Defined Networks and 5G
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersOntario Ministry of Research and InnovationMinistry of Science and Technology of Thailand
KeywordsComputer scienceNetwork Functions VirtualizationVirtualizationFunction (biology)Latency (audio)Virtual networkComputer networkFull virtualizationNetwork serviceOperating systemCloud computingTelecommunications

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Nowadays, businesses have benefited greatly from Network Function Virtualization (NFV), while users have gained newexperiences. By transforming network functions intoVirtual Network Functions (VNFs) running on High-Volume Servers (HVSs) instead of using dedicated hardware devices, NFV enables the reduction of Capital Expenditure (CAPEX) and Operation Expenditure (OPEX). However, NFV is now facing numerous issues, including performance, stability, and security. In this article, we examine the influence of VNF placement on the end-to-end latency. To reduce latency, the Latency-Aware VNF Placement (LAVP) algorithm, a heuristic technique, is offered to deal with the VNF placement problem by finding the best path for the Service Function Chain (SFC) while ensuring VNF ordering. The VNFs can then be resourced and deployed on the nodes along the path. Our algorithm is implemented on two different topologies and compared with other algorithms, namely First Fit, Best Fit,Worst Fit, and AvReStrategy. The experimental results show that our proposed solution can significantly reduce delays for the service chain with less execution time compared to other strategies.

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)0.001
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 score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.286
Teacher spread0.256 · 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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE AccessSame topicSoftware-Defined Networks and 5GFrench-language works237,207