MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W68716002

PARALLEL SIMULATION OF ATM NETWORKS: CASE STUDY AND LESSONS LEARNED

2007· article· en· W68716002 on OpenAlexaff
Carey Williamson, Brian Unger

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicNetwork Traffic and Congestion Control
Canadian institutionsUniversity of CalgaryUniversity of Saskatchewan
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAsynchronous Transfer ModeComputer scienceDiscrete event simulationNetwork traffic simulationLoad balancing (electrical power)ATM adaptation layerNetwork simulationBroadband networksScheduling (production processes)Distributed computingSynchronization (alternating current)GranularitySimulationComputer networkReal-time computingBroadbandNetwork traffic controlEngineeringTelecommunicationsOperating system
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper summarizes our experiences in developing and using a cell-level ATM network simulator called ATM-TN. The ATM-TN simulator was developed as part of TeleSim, a collaborative research project aimed at developing high performance parallel simulation tools for the design and analysis of broadband ATM networks. The ATM-TN simulator provides the fundamental platform for ongoing research in two areas: parallel simulation performance (e.g., optimistic synchronization, partitioning, dynamic load balancing) and ATM network performance (e.g., traffic modeling, ATM switch design, ABR traffic control). Our experiences with the simulator to date have been largely positive. On the parallel simulation front, we have found that ATM network simulation is a promising application domain for parallel simulationtechniques, though there are significant technical challenges to overcome regarding event granularity, simulation partitioning, scheduling, and load balancing. On the network performance f...

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.018

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.003
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.044
GPT teacher head0.321
Teacher spread0.278 · 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
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicNetwork Traffic and Congestion ControlFrench-language works237,207