MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Joint Optimization of TAS Scheduling and Synchronization Periodicity in Time Sensitive Networks

2025· article· W7117997179 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.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Language
FieldComputer Science
TopicNetwork Time Synchronization Technologies
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsScheduling (production processes)Synchronization (alternating current)Latency (audio)Overhead (engineering)Bandwidth (computing)Clock synchronizationNetwork delayDynamic priority scheduling

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Industry 4.0 applications require deterministic, low-latency and low-jitter communication. Ethernet, when augmented with Time Sensitive Networking standards like Time Aware Shaper (TAS), meets these requirements. For TAS to function accurately, precise network-wide time synchronization is required. However, due to clock drift of network devices, there can still be timing misalignment between devices, disrupting the TAS mechanism and compromising determinism. In our previous work, we proposed adjustment-based scheduling mechanisms that adjust TAS time slots to ensure deterministic latency and zero jitter. Despite their advantages, the approaches can be bandwidth inefficient compared to other forms of scheduling mechanisms. However, their efficiency can be improved by varying the synchronization periodicity.In this paper, we present a novel method to compute the optimal synchronization periodicity in a given network by balancing the synchronization overhead and the time-sensitive bandwidth requirement. This trade-off enables improvement of the overall network bandwidth efficiency without compromising determinism. Further it reveals the existence of an optimal operating region, a range of synchronization periodicity intervals where the network overhead cost remains low and stable. We validate the effectiveness of our approach through simulation-based case studies in realistic network scenarios. Compared to using the default synchronization periodicity value defined by IEEE standards, the proposed method reduces the overall network capacity overhead by up to 72% and 55% for the two scheduling method variants examined in this study.

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 score0.852
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.004
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.001
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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.212
Teacher spread0.206 · 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