MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4417498978 · doi:10.64771/ijesat.2025.047

SMART NETWORKING APPROACH FOR AUTOMATED INCIDENT MANAGEMENT

2025· article· W4417498978 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational journal of engineering science and advanced technology. · 2025
Typearticle
Language
FieldComputer Science
TopicWireless Sensor Networks for Data Analysis
Canadian institutionsCentre de Santé et de Services Sociaux Cavendish
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIncident managementAutomationKey (lock)Window (computing)Work (physics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Modern digital infrastructures are becoming increasingly complex, resulting in a higher frequency of network incidents that require rapid and accurate responses.Traditional manual incident management methods often lead to delays, human errors, and inefficient resource utilization.To overcome these limitations, this work presents a Smart Networking Approach for Automated Incident Management that integrates intelligent monitoring, machine learning-based anomaly detection, and automated decision-making mechanisms.The system continuously analyzes network traffic, correlates events from multiple sources, and predicts potential incidents using real-time analytics.Once an anomaly is detected, an automation engine initiates context-aware responses such as traffic rerouting, node isolation, or alert generation to prevent service disruption.Experimental analysis shows that the proposed approach significantly reduces detection latency, enhances accuracy, and minimizes downtime, making it suitable for enterprise networks, cloud environments, and large-scale IoT systems.Overall, this smart networking framework offers a scalable, proactive, and efficient solution for modern incident management.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.706
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0040.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.256
Teacher spread0.251 · 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