MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6976841018 · doi:10.60692/w86md-3zt75

An Iterative Optimization Approach for Routing, Modulation, and Categorical Spatial Bandwidth Block Allocation to Improve Network Performance for Dynamic Traffic in Elastic Optical Networks

2022· article· en· W6976841018 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueGreater South Information System · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicDiverse Aspects of Tourism Research
Canadian institutionsRoyal Military College of Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDynamic bandwidth allocationBandwidth (computing)Bandwidth allocationBlock (permutation group theory)Frequency allocationIterative methodRouting (electronic design automation)Channel allocation schemesDynamic network analysis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this work, we have proposed an iterative optimization model for allocating spectral resources in optical networks.The proposed model gives spatial routes and spatial bandwidth allocations in optical networks with variable data-rates, modulation schemes, and optical reach adaptation.We have also proposed an algorithm which allocates continuous and contiguous block of frequency slots (FS) between transponders which forms bandwidth partitions.The primary objective of the bandwidth partition is to reduce spatial fragmentation.The integrated approach includes the routing information from using the optimization model and the categorical spectrum allocation from using the proposed algorithm.The integrated approach has been used for dynamic traffic to improve network performance in terms of bandwidth blocking, link utilization, and fragmentation metrics.It has been shown that the FS utilization (FSU) and link utilization (LU) largely increase in the proposed integrated scheme with 80% LU compared to shortest path first (SPF) routing with LU as low as 20%.Similarly, the standard deviation between FSU in the proposed scheme is approximately 5% compared to 25% in other schemes which shows that the FSU sufficiently increases in the integrated approach.

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 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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.731
Threshold uncertainty score0.795

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.251
Teacher spread0.233 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations0
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGreater South Information SystemSame topicDiverse Aspects of Tourism ResearchFrench-language works237,207