The DOI matches its Crossref record; 455 of the 455 references it cites were found in a registry or an index; 5 of the 623 sources its claims cite were checked for support.
A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities
Open accessAbstract
Machine Learning (ML) has been enjoying an unprecedented surge in applications that solve problems and enable automation in diverse domains. Primarily, this is due to the explosion in the availability of data, significant improvements in ML techniques, and advancement in computing capabilities. Undoubtedly, ML has been applied to various mundane and complex problems arising in network operation and management. There are various surveys on ML for specific areas in networking or for specific network technologies. This survey is original, since it jointly presents the application of diverse ML techniques in various key areas of networking across different network technologies. In this way, readers will benefit from a comprehensive discussion on the different learning paradigms and ML techniques applied to fundamental problems in networking, including traffic prediction, routing and classification, congestion control, resource and fault management, QoS and QoE management, and network security. Furthermore, this survey delineates the limitations, give insights, research challenges and future opportunities to advance ML in networking. Therefore, this is a timely contribution of the implications of ML for networking, that is pushing the barriers of autonomic network operation and management.
Overview
AI snapshot
Written from a shortened version of the paper’s full text (it is longer than we read).
TL;DR
This survey synthesizes two decades of machine learning applications across networking, covering traffic prediction, classification, routing, congestion control, resource and fault management, QoS/QoE, and security. It argues that ML can advance autonomic network operation and management, while identifying limitations, research challenges, and future opportunities.
Key findings
- The survey jointly covers ML techniques across multiple networking problems and network technologies, rather than focusing on one area or technology such as cellular, WSN, MANET, or CRN.
- Reported representative results include payload-based AdaBoost traffic classification with overall precision of 99% and error rate within 0.5%; C4.5 DT for encrypted SSH traffic achieving 95.9% DR and 2.8% FPR on Dalhousie, 97.2% DR and 0.8% FPR on AMP, and 82.9% DR and 0.5% FPR on MAWI.
- For encrypted HTTPS service classification, RF achieved precision 92.6%, recall 92.8%, and F-measure 92.6%, with service classification accuracy between 95–100% for most providers and overall system accuracy of 93.10% with less than 20% degradation over 23 weeks without retraining.
- Reinforcement learning dominates traffic routing research; for example, Q-PR achieved over 98% successful delivery versus 75.66% for GPSR, reduced retransmission retries and acknowledgements by over 50% and 40% versus GPSR and EFE, and preserved WSN lifetime 3× and 4× more than GPSR and EFE, respectively.
Methods
- This is a comprehensive literature survey, not a primary empirical study. It reviews peer-reviewed literature published over the past two decades, selected by a combination of publication year, citation count, and merit.
- The paper organizes ML techniques by networking problem area: traffic prediction, traffic classification, traffic routing, congestion control, resource management, fault management, QoS/QoE management, and network security.
- It summarizes surveyed works in tables covering ML technique, dataset, features, evaluation settings, and reported results, and discusses learning paradigms, data collection, feature engineering, ground truth, and performance metrics.
Limitations
- The paper does not explicitly state its own limitations; it states limitations of surveyed works, including reliance on synthetic or simulated data, lack of common metrics/datasets for comparison, scarcity of fault data in production networks, and difficulty obtaining complete representations of normal behavior for anomaly detection.
- Evident from the text: as a survey, it provides no new experiments or primary validation, and its selection criteria are not described as a systematic review protocol.
- The paper also notes that some areas remain preliminary, such as SDN/NFV-based traffic classification, and that many ML-based congestion control and resource management solutions still need evaluation on real networks and real data.
Model-written summary. Check it against the paper before relying on it.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
442 Not checked yet · 122 Own interpretation · 105 No basis given · 11 Own result · 3 Own method · 2 Supported so far · 2 Partly supported · 1 Supported · accuracy not yet measured
The sources with a verdict support this claim; the rest weren’t checked yet, have no full text we could read, or their verdicts aren’t rated yet.
In the paper
“Though there are various surveys on ML in networking [18,61,82,142,246,339], this survey is purposefully different.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 1 Introduction
What the sources say
- Supportedcites [18] Alsheikh MA, Lin S, Niyato D, Tan HP. Machine learning in wireless sensor networks: Algorithms, strategies, and applications. IEEE Commun Surv Tutor. 2014; 16(4):1996–2018. source
The Introduction (p. 2) identifies this work as a survey of machine learning in wireless sensor networks and discusses earlier surveys focused on WSNs, wireless ad-hoc networks, or particular WSN challenges. It therefore serves as an example of a survey specialized to a network technology, as the citing sentence requires. (LLM, conf=0.92)
- Not checked yetcites [61] Bkassiny M, Li Y, Jayaweera SK. A survey on machine-learning techniques in cognitive radios. IEEE Commun Surv Tutor. 2013; 15(3):1136–59. source
- Not checked yetcites [82] Buczak AL, Guven E. A survey of data mining and machine learning methods for cyber security intrusion detection. IEEE Commun Surv Tutor. 2016; 18(2):1153–76. source
- Not checked yetcites [142] Fadlullah Z, Tang F, Mao B, Kato N, Akashi O, Inoue T, Mizutani K. State-of-the-art deep learning: Evolving machine intelligence toward tomorrow’s intelligent network traffic control systems. IEEE Commun Surv Tutor. 2017; PP(99):1.
- Not checked yetcites [246] Klaine PV, Imran MA, Onireti O, Souza RD. A survey of machine learning techniques applied to self organizing cellular networks. IEEE Commun Surv Tutor. 2017; PP(99):1.
- Not checked yetcites [339] Nguyen TTT, Armitage G. A survey of techniques for internet traffic classification using machine learning. IEEE Commun Surv Tutor. 2008b; 10(4):56–76. source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Supported
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“As depicted in Table 13, the majority of these proposals apply diverse supervised learning techniques, mostly for prediction.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 6.4 Congestion inference
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“However, the evaluation was based only on simulations of wired networks, though including single and multiple bottleneck topologies.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 6.5 Summary
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In addition, all the classifiers perform binary classification of packet losses.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 6.5 Summary
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“TCP variants built upon these ML-based CWND updating mechanisms perform better in terms of throughput and delay than standard and non-ML TCP versions particularly enhanced for specific network conditions (e.g.TCP-FeW and TCP-Cubic).”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 6.5 Summary
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Whereas, the other half either use CALA or an own RL design on a wider range of network architectures, including satellite, cellular, and data center networks.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 6.5 Summary
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Half of these ML-based approaches apply FALA, CALA, or Q-learning (including the FK function approximation) on resource-constrained networks (i.e.WANET and IoT).”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 6.5 Summary
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The other half of ML-based schemes employ reinforcement-based methods for deducing the increment in the packet drop probability.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 6.5 Summary
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Some of the ML-based TCP also show improvements in packet loss and fairness.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 6.5 Summary
plainconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“As depicted in Table 11, half of the ML-based AQM schemes apply supervised OLS and NN for predicting future time series values of either traffic volume or queue length.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 6.5 Summary
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- It may state two separate claims as one. 223
- Probably not a substantial claim. 267
- The quote only partly states this claim. 4
The sources with a verdict support this claim; the rest weren’t checked yet, have no full text we could read, or their verdicts aren’t rated yet.
In the paper
“On the other hand, Klaine et al. [246], Bkassiny et al. [61] and Alsheikh et al. [18], though comprehensive in their coverage of ML techniques in networking, are specialized to specific network technology i.e. cellular network, CRN and WSN, respectively.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 1 Introduction
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [246] Klaine PV, Imran MA, Onireti O, Souza RD. A survey of machine learning techniques applied to self organizing cellular networks. IEEE Commun Surv Tutor. 2017; PP(99):1.
- Not checked yetcites [61] Bkassiny M, Li Y, Jayaweera SK. A survey on machine-learning techniques in cognitive radios. IEEE Commun Surv Tutor. 2013; 15(3):1136–59. source
- Supportedcites [18] Alsheikh MA, Lin S, Niyato D, Tan HP. Machine learning in wireless sensor networks: Algorithms, strategies, and applications. IEEE Commun Surv Tutor. 2014; 16(4):1996–2018. source
Split into 2 atoms — 2 confirmed, 0 partially supported, 0 disputed, 0 misattributed, 0 unverifiable. Expand the claim to see per-atom verdicts.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
Every source the paper cites for this claim was checked and supports it.
In the paper
“Bermolen et al. [52] consider the prospect of applying SVR for link load forecasting.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 3.1 Traffic prediction as a pure TSF problem
What the sources say
- Supportedcites [52] Bermolen P, Rossi D. Support vector regression for link load prediction. Comput Netw. 2009; 53(2):191–201. source
The Abstract says the paper explores Support Vector Regression for link load forecasting. Section 4 describes how the authors apply SVR to that problem, directly supporting the citing sentence. (LLM, conf=0.95)
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Supported
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“However, it is not widely applicable and is highly sensitive to the observation window size.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 4.4 Summary
What the sources say
- Partly supportedcites [146] Finamore A, Mellia M, Meo M, Rossi D. Kiss: Stochastic packet inspection classifier for udp traffic. IEEE/ACM Trans Netw. 2010; 18(5):1505–15. sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Coverage section (page unavailable) says KISS is unsuitable for short-lived UDP flows, supporting a limited-applicability claim for that setting, not for supervised payload-based classification generally. The Packet Window section (page unavailable) says false positives are sensitive to window size, but true positives are almost unaffected; the claim overstates the sensitivity of classification overall. (LLM, conf=0.85)
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Partly supported
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“the training time of DT is the fastest, with a small reduction in accuracy of less than 4% compared to Boosting DT.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 6.1 Packet loss classification
What the sources say
- Partly supportedcites [129] El Khayat I, Geurts P, Leduc G. Improving TCP in Wireless Networks with an Adaptive Machine-Learnt Classifier of Packet Loss Causes. Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer Berlin Heidelberg; 2005, pp. 549–60. sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
Section 3.2 says boosting decision trees improves accuracy relative to a single tree, supporting the direction of the accuracy comparison. It gives no figure for an accuracy reduction of less than 4%. Section 3.4 discusses classification time, not training time, and does not establish that a single decision tree trains fastest. Page numbers are unavailable in our copy. (LLM, conf=0.82)
- Not checked yetcites [130] El Khayat I, Geurts P, Leduc G. Enhancement of tcp over wired/wireless networks with packet loss classifiers inferred by supervised learning. Wirel Netw. 2010; 16(2):273–90. source
- Not checked yetcites [163] Geurts P, Khayat IE, Leduc G. A machine learning approach to improve congestion control over wireless computer networks. In: Data Mining, 2004. ICDM ’04. Fourth IEEE International Conference on: 2004. p. 383–6. source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Partly supported
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Undoubtedly, ML has been applied to various mundane and complex problems arising in network operation and management.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > Abstract
boosted- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Whereas, passive monitoring eliminates this overhead, at the expense of additional devices that analyze the network traffic to gather relevant information.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 2.2 Data collection
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Evidently, active monitoring introduces additional overhead due to bandwidth consumption from injected traffic.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 2.2 Data collection
boosteddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Additionally, none of the ML-based AQM schemes have considered providing a fair link share among senders and have not been tested under coexisting legacy schemes in other bottleneck links in the network.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 6.5 Summary
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In addition, MLP-NN, though applied with a variety of parameter settings, is the most popular supervised technique, while Q-learning dominates the choice of RL-based approaches.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 7.3 Summary
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Although the ML-based resource management schemes studied in this paper differ in terms of the feature sets, they either predict one or more QoS metrics of interest or generate an acceptance/rejection decision for an incoming request, based on a QoS estimation.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 7.3 Summary
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“While both normal and fault data are easily available for a test or simulated network, only normal data with infrequent faults are routinely available for a production network.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 8.5 Summary
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Nonetheless, NN-based supervised approaches exhibit steady performance in terms of both accuracy and convergence.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 7.3 Summary
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The focus of the majority of approaches is on wireless networks, where resource contention is more profound than wired networks.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 7.3 Summary
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“However, unsupervised techniques can take longer time to converge than supervised approaches, potentially missing any fault occurring before the convergence.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 8.5 Summary
plainconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“it can detect 30 anomaly records with 17 FPs, and 26 anomaly records with 1 FP”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 10.2.1 Flow feature-based anomaly detection
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [7] Ahmed T, Coates M, Lakhina A. Multivariate online anomaly detection using kernel recursive least squares.IEEE; 2007. pp. 625–33. source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“On the other hand, for the flow-count time series, KOAD outperforms PCA and OCNM in terms of detection rate but at the cost of a higher FP.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 10.2.1 Flow feature-based anomaly detection
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [7] Ahmed T, Coates M, Lakhina A. Multivariate online anomaly detection using kernel recursive least squares.IEEE; 2007. pp. 625–33. source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“For a dataset with known attacks, both RBF-SVM with limited and all features return a TP above 98% for the malware traces, while TP of RBF-SVM is 86.2% for normal traces.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 10.2.1 Flow feature-based anomaly detection
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [64] Boero L, Marchese M, Zappatore S. Support vector machine meets software defined networking in ids domain. In: Proceedings of the 29th International Teletraffic Congress (ITC), vol. 3. New York: IEEE: 2017. p. 25–30.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“In packet time series, OCNM flags 26 out of 34 anomalies but generates 14 FPs”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 10.2.1 Flow feature-based anomaly detection
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [7] Ahmed T, Coates M, Lakhina A. Multivariate online anomaly detection using kernel recursive least squares.IEEE; 2007. pp. 625–33. source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“A quick glance at Tables 22, 23, and 24 will reveal that the KDD'99 dataset is the dataset of choice in most anomaly-based intrusion detection literature, where some have also employed the improved version of the dataset, NSL-KDD [438] released in 2009.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 10.2.1 Flow feature-based anomaly detection
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [438] Tavallaee M, Bagheri E, Lu W, Ghorbani AA. A detailed analysis of the kdd cup 99 data set.IEEE; 2009, pp. 1–6. source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Jiang et al. [220] challenge this notion by showcasing that the size of the cluster is not sufficient to detect anomalies and has to be coupled with the distance of the cluster from other clusters, to increase accuracy of detection.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 10.2.1 Flow feature-based anomaly detection
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [220] Jiang S, Song X, Wang H, Han JJ, Li QH. A clustering-based method for unsupervised intrusion detections. Pattern Recog Lett. 2006; 27(7):802–10. source
boosteddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“They evaluate their work on the KDD dataset, and observe that SOM-based anomaly detection achieves an average DR (ADR) of 89% with FP in the range of , for each individual protocol and network service; e.g.ICMP, HTTP, FTP, and Mail.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > Kayacik et al.
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [232] Kayacik HG, Zincir-Heywood AN, Heywood MI. On the capability of an SOM-based intrusion detection system. In: Proceedings of the International Joint Conference on Neural Networks. New York: IEEE: 2003. p. 1808–13.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“For instance, Nguyen and Armitage [339], though impactful, is now dated and only addresses traffic classification in networking.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 1 Introduction
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [339] Nguyen TTT, Armitage G. A survey of techniques for internet traffic classification using machine learning. IEEE Commun Surv Tutor. 2008b; 10(4):56–76. source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The main obstacles include what data can be collected from and what control actions can be exercised on legacy network devices.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 1 Introduction
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Generally, ML is ideal for inferring solutions to problems that have a large representative dataset.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 2 Machine learning for networking-a primer
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The key criteria used in the selection is a combination of the year of publication, citation count and merit.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 1 Introduction
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
In the paper
“Despite these advances, network operations and management still remains cumbersome, and network faults are prevalent primarily due to human error [291].”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 1 Introduction
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [291] Mahmoud Q. Cognitive Networks: Towards Self-Aware Networks.Wiley-Interscience; 2007. source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Second, the network is continually evolving and the dynamics inhibit the application of a fixed set of patterns that aid in network operation and management.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 1 Introduction
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“It is almost impossible to manually keep up with network administration, due to the continuous growth in the number of applications running in the network and the kinds of devices connected to the network.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 1 Introduction
boosteddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The cognition from ML can be used to aid in the automation of network operation and management tasks.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 1 Introduction
plainconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The imbalance in the number of training data across classes, is a violation of the assumptions maintained by many ML techniques, that is, the data is independent and identically distributed.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 2.4 Establishing ground truth
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“It is important to note that there is a strong relationship between the training data, problem and the learning paradigm.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 2.1 Learning paradigms
boostedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Though there are different categories of problems that enjoy the benefits of ML, there is a generic approach to building ML-based solutions.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 2 Machine learning for networking-a primer
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Networking problems can be formulated as one of these problems that can leverage ML.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 2 Machine learning for networking-a primer
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Inadvertently, the ground truth drives the accuracy of ML models.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 2.4 Establishing ground truth
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
In the paper
“These models are good at inferring discriminators for binary, textual and structural content [286].”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 2.4 Establishing ground truth
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [286] Ma J, Levchenko K, Kreibich C, Savage S, Voelker GM. Unexpected means of protocol inference. In: Proceedings of the 6th ACM SIGCOMM conference on Internet measurement.2006. p. 313–26. source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“Hence, RL is best suited for making cognitive choices, such as decision making, planning and scheduling [441].”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 2.1 Learning paradigms
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [441] Tesauro G. Reinforcement learning in autonomic computing: A manifesto and case studies. IEEE Internet Comput. 2007; 11(1):22–30. source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“For instance, in traffic classification, establishing ground truth for application classes in the training dataset can be achieved using application signature pattern matching [140].”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 2.4 Establishing ground truth
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [140] Este A, Gringoli F, Salgarelli L. Support vector machines for tcp traffic classification. Comput Netw. 2009; 53(14):2476–90. source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Irrelevant features increase computational overhead with marginal to no gain in accuracy, while redundant features promote over-fitting.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 2.3 Feature engineering
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Average packet size is fairly constant in nature [492] and packet inter-arrival times are a good discriminator for bulk data transfer (e.g.FTP) and streaming applications [390].”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 2.3 Feature engineering
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [492] Zander S, Nguyen T, Armitage G. Automated traffic classification and application identification using machine learning.IEEE; 2005, pp. 250–7. source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“Therefore, typically there is a need to combat class imbalance by applying under-, over-, joint-, or ensemble-sampling techniques [267].”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 2.4 Establishing ground truth
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [267] Lemaître G, Nogueira F, Aridas CK. Imbalanced-learn: A python toolbox to tackle the curse of imbalanced datasets in machine learning. J Mach Learn Res. 2017; 18(17):1–5.
plainconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Unlike, generative and discriminative approaches that are myopic in nature, RL may sacrifice immediate gains for longterm rewards.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 2.1 Learning paradigms
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“However, these application signatures must be kept up-to-date and adapted to the application dynamics [176].”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 2.4 Establishing ground truth
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [176] Haffner P, Sen S, Spatscheck O, Wang D. Acas: automated construction of application signatures. In: Proceedings of the 2005 ACM SIGCOMM workshop on Mining network data. New York: ACM: 2005. p. 197–202.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In addition, both validation and testing datasets should be independent of the training dataset and follow the same probability distribution as the training dataset.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 2.2 Data collection
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“ML techniques require representative data, possibly without bias, to build an effective ML model for a given networking problem.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 2.2 Data collection
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“However, the outcomes are periodically validated, since they can drift over time, known as concept drifting.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 2 Machine learning for networking-a primer
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Application signatures for encrypted traffic (e.g.SSH, HTTPS) extract the signature from unencrypted handshakes.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 2.4 Establishing ground truth
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“In 1977, in the area of statistical learning, Dempster et al. proposed EM, a generalization of the previous iterative, unsupervised methods, such as the Baum-Welch algorithm, for learning the unknown parameters of statistical HMM models [115].”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 2.6 Evolution of machine learning techniques
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [115] Dempster AP, Laird NM, Rubin DB. Maximum likelihood from incomplete data via the em algorithm. J R Stat Soc Ser B (Method). 1977; 39(1):1–38. source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Towards the end of the 1970s, the second generation of DTs emerged as the Iterative Dichotomiser 3 (ID3) algorithm was released.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 2.6 Evolution of machine learning techniques
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Though, BP is widely used in training NNs, its efficiency depends on the choice of initial weights.In particular, BP has been shown to have slower speed of convergence and to fall into local optima.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 2.6 Evolution of machine learning techniques
boosteddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“In addition, the Markov model [159, 296] (elaborated 50 years earlier) was leveraged to construct a process based on discrete-time state transitions and action rewards, named Markov Decision Process (MDP), which formalizes sequential decision-making problems in a fully observable, controlled environment [46].”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 2.6 Evolution of machine learning techniques
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [159] Gagniuc P. Markov Chains: From Theory to Implementation and Experimentation.Hoboken: Wiley; 2017. source
- Not checked yetcites [296] Markov AA. An example of statistical investigation in the text of eugene onegin illustrating coupling of tests in chains. In: Proceedings of the Royal Academy of Sciences of St. Petersburg, St. Petersburg, Rusia, vol 1.1913. p. 153.
- Not checked yetcites [46] Bellman R. Dynamic Programming, 1st ed. Princeton: Princeton University Press; 1957.
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“At the same time, Witten developed an RL approach to solve MDPs, inspired by animal behavior and learning theories [478], that was later referred to as Temporal Difference (TD) in Sutton's work [433,434].”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 2.6 Evolution of machine learning techniques
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [478] Witten IH. An adaptive optimal controller for discrete-time markov environments. Inf Control. 1977; 34(4):286–95. source
- Not checked yetcites [433] Sutton RS. Learning to predict by the methods of temporal differences. Mach learn. 1988; 3(1):9–44.
- Not checked yetcites [434] Sutton RS, Barto AG. A temporal-difference model of classical conditioning. In: Proceedings of the ninth annual conference of the cognitive science society. Seattle, WA: 1987. p. 355–78.
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Although ML research was progressing slower than projected in the 1970s [397], the 1970s were marked by milestones that greatly shaped the evolution of ML, and contributed to its success in the following years.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 2.6 Evolution of machine learning techniques
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [397] Russell S, Norvig P. Artificial Intelligence: A Modern Approach, 3rd ed. Upper Saddle River: Prentice Hall Press; 2009.
boosteddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“By the end of the 1950s, the term “Machine Learning” was coined and defined for the first time by Arthur Samuel (cf., Section 2), who also developed a checkers-playing game that is recognized as the earliest self-learning program [401].”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 2.6 Evolution of machine learning techniques
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [401] Samuel AL. Some studies in machine learning using the game of checkers. IBM J Res Dev. 1959; 3(3):210–29. source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“The partially observable Markov decision process (POMDP) approach to finding optimal or near-optimal control strategies for partially observable stochastic environments, given a complete model of the environment, was first proposed by Cassandra et al. [25] in 1965, while the algorithm to find the optimal solution was only devised 5 years later”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 2.6 Evolution of machine learning techniques
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [25] Astrom K. Optimal control of markov processes with incomplete state information. J Mathl Anal Appl. 1965; 10(1):174–205. source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“Over the years, global optimization methods have been proposed to replace BP, including Genetic Algorithms (GA), Simulated Annealing (SA), and Ant Colony (AC) algorithm [500].”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 2.6 Evolution of machine learning techniques
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [500] Zhu Y, Zhang G, Qiu J. Network traffic prediction based on particle swarm bp neural network. JNW. 2013; 8(11):2685–91.
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“For example, uniform weighted threshold under-sampling creates smaller balanced training sets [222].”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 2.4 Establishing ground truth
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [222] Jin Y, Duffield N, Erman J, Haffner P, Sen S, Zhang ZL. A modular machine learning system for flow-level traffic classification in large networks. ACM Trans Knowl Discov Data (TKDD). 2012; 6(1):4.
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“In the meantime, the first algorithm for training MLP-NNs with many layers -also known as Deep NN (DNN) in today's jargon-was published by Ivakhnenko and Lapa in 1965 [210].”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 2.6 Evolution of machine learning techniques
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [210] Ivakhnenko A, Lapa V, ENGINEERING PULISOE. Cybernetic Predicting Devices. Purdue University School of Electrical Engineering; 1965.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“In the area of clustering, Steinhaus [422] was the first to propose a continuous version of the to be called k-Means algorithm [290], to partition a heterogeneous solid with a given internal mass distribution into k subsets.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 2.6 Evolution of machine learning techniques
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [422] Steinhaus H. Sur la division des corp materiels en parties. Bull Acad Polon Sci. 1956; 1:801–4.
- Not checked yetcites [290] MacQueen J. Some methods for classification and analysis of multivariate observations. In: Proceedings of the Fifth Berkeley Symposium on Mathematical Statistics and Probability, Volume 1: Statistics, University of California Press, Berkeley, 1: 1967. p. 281–97.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Although CMAC was primarily designed as a function modeler for robotic controllers, it has been extensively used in RL and classification problems for its faster learning compared to MLP.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 2.6 Evolution of machine learning techniques
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“In 1975, Albus proposed CMAC, a new type of NN as an alternative to MLP [11].”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 2.6 Evolution of machine learning techniques
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [11] Albus JS. A new approach to manipulator control: the cerebellar model articulation controller (cmac). J Dyn Syst Meas. Control. 1975; 97:220–7. source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“BP is to date the most popular NN training algorithm, and comes in different variants such as Gradient Descent (GD), Conjugate Gradient (CG), One Step Secant (SS), Levenberg-Marquardt (LM), and Resilient backpropagation (Rp).”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 2.6 Evolution of machine learning techniques
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“These include the Backpropagation (BP) algorithm, the Cerebellar Model Articulation Controller (CMAC) NN model [11], the Expectation Maximization (EM) algorithm [115], the to-be-referred-to as Temporal Difference (TD) learning [478], and the Iterative Dichotomiser 3 (ID3) algorithm [373].”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 2.6 Evolution of machine learning techniques
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [11] Albus JS. A new approach to manipulator control: the cerebellar model articulation controller (cmac). J Dyn Syst Meas. Control. 1975; 97:220–7. source
- Not checked yetcites [115] Dempster AP, Laird NM, Rubin DB. Maximum likelihood from incomplete data via the em algorithm. J R Stat Soc Ser B (Method). 1977; 39(1):1–38. source
- Not checked yetcites [478] Witten IH. An adaptive optimal controller for discrete-time markov environments. Inf Control. 1977; 34(4):286–95. source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“It should be noted that a classification model with a negative gradient in the ROC curve can be easily improved by flipping the predictions from the model [16] or swapping the labels of the actual instances.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 2.5 Performance metrics and model validation
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [16] Alpaydin E. Introduction to Machine Learning, 3rd ed. Cambridge: MIT Press; 2014.
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“The algorithm, developed by Quinlan [373], relies on a novel concept for attribute selection based on entropy maximization.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 2.6 Evolution of machine learning techniques
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [373] Quinlan J. Discovering rules form large collections of examples: A case study. Edingburgh: Expert Systems in the Micro Electronic Age Edinburgh Press; 1979.
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“By the end of the 1960s, Minsky and Papertkey's Perceptrons book [315] drew the limitations of perceptrons-based NN through mathematical analysis, marking a historical turn in AI and ML in particular, and significantly reducing the research interest for this area over the next several years [397].”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 2.6 Evolution of machine learning techniques
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [315] Minsky M, Papert S. Perceptrons: An Introduction to Computational Geometry. Cambridge: MIT Press; 1972.
- Not checked yetcites [397] Russell S, Norvig P. Artificial Intelligence: A Modern Approach, 3rd ed. Upper Saddle River: Prentice Hall Press; 2009.
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“This algorithm marked the commencement of the Deep Learning (DL) discipline, though the term only started to be used in the 1980s in the general context of ML, and in the year 2000 in the specific context of NNs [9].”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 2.6 Evolution of machine learning techniques
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [9] Aizenberg IN, Aizenberg NN, Vandewalle JP. Multi-Valued and Universal Binary Neurons: Theory, Learning and Applications. Norwell: Kluwer Academic Publishers; 2000. source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Werbos's application of BP -originally a control theory algorithm from the 1960s [80,81,233]-to train NNs [472] resurrected the research in the area.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 2.6 Evolution of machine learning techniques
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [472] Werbos P. Beyond regression: New tools for prediction and analysis in the behavioral sciences. PhD thesis: Harvard University; 1975.
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“The Baum-Welch algorithm [41] was proposed in the mi-1960s to learn those conditional probabilities.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 2.6 Evolution of machine learning techniques
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [41] Baum LE, Petrie T. Statistical inference for probabilistic functions of finite state markov chains. Ann Math Statist. 1966; 37(6):1554–63. source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“ML research continued to flourish in the 1960s, giving rise to a novel statistical class of the Markov model, named Hidden Markov Model (HMM) [426].”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 2.6 Evolution of machine learning techniques
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [426] Stratonovich RL. Conditional markov processes. Theory Probab Appl. 1960; 5(2):156–78. source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“The 1950s also witnessed the first applications of the Naïve Bayes (NB) classifier in the fields of pattern recognition [97] and information retrieval [297].”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 2.6 Evolution of machine learning techniques
What the sources say
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“Similarly to CNN, SOM was also designed for a specific application domain; dimensionality reduction [249].”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 2.6 Evolution of machine learning techniques
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [249] Kohonen T. Self-organized formation of topologically correct feature maps. Biol Cybern. 1982; 43(1):59–69. source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In 1982, the first form of Recurrent Neural Network (RNN) was introduced by Hopfield.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 2.6 Evolution of machine learning techniques
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Named after the inventor, Hopfield network is an RNN where the weights connecting the neurons are bidirectional.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 2.6 Evolution of machine learning techniques
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“As such, RNNs are found particularly useful in Time Series Forecasting (TSF), handwriting recognition and speech recognition.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 2.6 Evolution of machine learning techniques
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Q-learning, however, replaces the traditional state-value function of TD by an action-value function (i.e.Q-value) that estimates the utility of taking a specific action in specific states.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 2.6 Evolution of machine learning techniques
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The second half of 1980s also witnessed the increase in popularity of the BP algorithm and its successful application in training DNNs”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 2.6 Evolution of machine learning techniques
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“CNN is a feedforward NN specifically designed to be applied to visual imagery analysis and classification, and thus require minimal image preprocessing.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 2.6 Evolution of machine learning techniques
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“TD(λ) adds a discount factor (0 ≤ λ ≤ 1) that determines to what extent estimates of previous statevalues are eligible for updating based on current errors, in the policy evaluation process.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 2.6 Evolution of machine learning techniques
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Connectivity between neurons in CNN is inspired by the organization of the animal visual cortex -modeled by Hubel in the 1960s [200,201]-, where the visual field is divided between neurons, each responding to stimuli only in its corresponding region.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 2.6 Evolution of machine learning techniques
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [200] Hubel DH, Wiesel TN. Receptive fields of single neurones in the cat’s striate cortex. J Physiol. 1959; 148(3):574–91. source
- Not checked yetcites [201] Hubel DH, Wiesel TN. Receptive fields, binocular interaction and functional architecture in the cat’s visual cortex. J Physiol. 1962; 160(1):106–54. source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“In the early 1980s, three new classes of NNs emerged, namely Convolutional Neural Network (CNN) [157], Self-Organizing Map (SOM) [249], and Hopfield network [195].”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 2.6 Evolution of machine learning techniques
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [157] Fukushima K. Neocognitron: A self-organizing neural network model for a mechanism of pattern recognition unaffected by shift in position. Biol Cybern. 1980; 36(4):193–202. source
- Not checked yetcites [249] Kohonen T. Self-organized formation of topologically correct feature maps. Biol Cybern. 1982; 43(1):59–69. source
- Not checked yetcites [195] Hopfield JJ. Neural networks and physical systems with emergent collective computational abilities. Proc Natl Acad Sci. 1982; 79(8):2554–8. http://www.pnas.org/content/79/8/2554.full.pdf . source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“Two DT learning algorithms, similar to ID3 but developed independently, referred to as Classification And Regression Trees (CART) [76], were proposed to model classification and regression problems.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 2.6 Evolution of machine learning techniques
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [76] Breiman L, Friedman J, Stone C, Olshen R. Classification and Regression Trees. The Wadsworth and Brooks-Cole statistics-probability series. New York: Taylor & Francis; 1984.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“Originally named Harmonium by Smolensky, RBM is a variant of Boltzmann machines [2] with the restriction that there are no connections within any of the network layers, whether it is visible or hidden.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 2.6 Evolution of machine learning techniques
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [2] Ackley DH, Hinton GE, Sejnowski TJ. A learning algorithm for boltzmann machines. Cogn Sci. 1985; 9(1):147–69. source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Towards the end of 1980s, TLFN -an MLP that incorporates the time dimension into the model for conducting TSF [260]-, and RBFNN -an NN with a weighted set of Radial Basis Function (RBF) kernels that can be trained in unsupervised and supervised ways [78]-joined the growing list of NN classes.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 2.6 Evolution of machine learning techniques
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [260] Lapedes AS, Farber RM. How neural nets work.1987.
- Not checked yetcites [78] Broomhead DS, Lowe D. Radial basis functions, multi-variable functional interpolation and adaptive networks. Memorandum No. 4148. Malvern: Royal Signals and Radar Establishment; 1988.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“Another DT algorithm, under the name of Reduced Error Pruning Tree (REPTree), was also introduced for classification.REPTree aimed at building faster and simpler tree models using information gain for splitting, along with reduced-error pruning [374].”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 2.6 Evolution of machine learning techniques
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [374] Quinlan JR. Simplifying decision trees. Int J Man-Mach Stud. 1987; 27(3):221–34. source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“The modern definition of RNN, as a network where connections between neurons exhibit one or more than one cycle, was introduced by Jordan in 1986 [226].”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 2.6 Evolution of machine learning techniques
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [226] Jordan MI. Serial order: A parallel distributed processing approach. Tech. Rep. ICS Report 8604. San Diego: University of California; 1986.
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“As of today, Q-learning is the most well-studied and widely-used model-free RL algorithm.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 2.6 Evolution of machine learning techniques
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Distributed representation establishes a many-to-many relationship between neurons and (feature,value) pairs for improved efficiency, such that a (feature,value) input is represented by a pattern of activity across neurons as opposed to being locally represented by a single neuron.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 2.6 Evolution of machine learning techniques
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“SOMs employ an unsupervised competitive learning approach, unlike traditional NNs that apply error-correction learning (such as BP with gradient descent).”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 2.6 Evolution of machine learning techniques
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The 1980s witnessed a renewed interest in ML research, and in particular in NNs.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 2.6 Evolution of machine learning techniques
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“ID3 is a precursor to the popular and widely used C4.5 and C5.0 algorithms.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 2.6 Evolution of machine learning techniques
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Cycles provide a structure for internal states or memory allowing RNNs to process arbitrary sequences of inputs.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 2.6 Evolution of machine learning techniques
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Indeed any of the above NNs can be employed in a DL architecture, either by implementing a larger number of hidden layers or stacking multiple simple NNs.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 2.6 Evolution of machine learning techniques
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Among these techniques, Bayesian Network (BN) arose as a Directed Acyclic Graph (DAG) representation model for the statistical models in use [352], such as NB and HMM -the latter considered as the simplest dynamic BN [107, 110]-.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 2.6 Evolution of machine learning techniques
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [352] Pearl J. Bayesian networks: A model of self-activated memory for evidential reasoning. Irvine: University of California; 1985, pp. 329–34.
- Not checked yetcites [107] Dagum P, Galper A, Horvitz EJ. Temporal Probabilistic Reasoning: Dynamic Network Models for Forecasting. Stanford: Knowledge Systems Laboratory, Medical Computer Science, Stanford University; 1991.
- Not checked yetcites [110] Dean T, Kanazawa K. A model for reasoning about persistence and causation. Comput Intell. 1989; 5(2):142–50. source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“RBMs are found useful in a variety of application domains such as dimensionality reduction, feature learning, and classification, as they can be trained in both supervised and unsupervised ways.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 2.6 Evolution of machine learning techniques
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“This restriction allows for more efficient and simpler learning compared to traditional Boltzmann machines.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 2.6 Evolution of machine learning techniques
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“Several key concepts emerged from the 1980s' connectionism movement, one of which is the concept of distributed representation [187].Introduced by Hinton in 1986, this concept supports the idea that a system should be represented by many features and that each feature may have different values.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 2.6 Evolution of machine learning techniques
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [187] Hinton GE, McClelland JL, Rumelhart DE. Parallel distributed processing: Explorations in the microstructure of cognition, vol. 1 In: Rumelhart DE, McClelland JL, PDP Research Group C, editors. Parallel Distributed Processing: Explorations in the Microstructure of Cognition. Cambridge, MA, USA, chap Distributed Representations: MIT Press: 1986. p. 77–109.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Interestingly, although the use of the term “deep learning” in the ML community dates back to 1986 [111], it did not apply to NNs at that time.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 2.6 Evolution of machine learning techniques
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [111] Dechter R. Learning while searching in constraint-satisfaction-problems. In: Proceedings of the Fifth AAAI National Conference on Artificial Intelligence, AAAI Press, AAAI’86.Palo Alto: AAAI Press: 1986. p. 178–83.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Towards the end of 1980s, two TD approaches were proposed for reinforcement learning: TD(λ) [433] and Qlearning [471].”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 2.6 Evolution of machine learning techniques
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [433] Sutton RS. Learning to predict by the methods of temporal differences. Mach learn. 1988; 3(1):9–44.
- Not checked yetcites [471] Watkins CJ. Models of delayed reinforcement learning. PhD thesis: Psychology Department, Cambridge University; 1989.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“Research on regression analysis propounded the Least Absolute Selection and Shrinkage Operator (LASSO), which performs variable selection and regularization for higher prediction accuracy [445].”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 2.6 Evolution of machine learning techniques
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [445] Tibshirani R. Regression shrinkage and selection via the lasso. J R Stat Soc Ser B (Methodol). 1996; 58(1):267–288. source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“A singleclass SVM is a binary classifier that deduces the hyperplane to differentiate between the data belonging to the class against the rest of the data, that is, one-vs-rest.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 2.6 Evolution of machine learning techniques
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“SVM enables plugging different kernel functions (e.g.linear, polynomial, RBF) to find the optimal solution in higherdimensional feature spaces.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 2.6 Evolution of machine learning techniques
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“One well-known variant of the M5 algorithm is M5P, which aims at building trees for regression models.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 2.6 Evolution of machine learning techniques
boosted- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Research efforts in the field generated some of the the most widely used implementations of ensemble DT as of today: Multiple Additive Regression Trees (MART) [154], extra-trees [164], and eXtreme Gradient Boosting (XGBoost) [93].”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 2.6 Evolution of machine learning techniques
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [154] Friedman JH. Greedy function approximation: A gradient boosting machine. Ann Statist. 2001; 29(5):1189–232. source
- Not checked yetcites [164] Geurts P, Ernst D, Wehenkel L. Extremely randomized trees. Mach Learn. 2006; 63(1):3–42. source
- Not checked yetcites [93] Chen T, Guestrin C. XGBoost: A Scalable Tree Boosting System. In: Proceedings of the 22Nd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. New York: ACM: 2016. p. 785–94.
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“These advances in ML facilitated the successful deployment of major use cases in the 1990s, particularly, handwriting recognition [419] and data mining [3].”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 2.6 Evolution of machine learning techniques
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [419] Srihari SN, Kuebert EJ. Integration of hand-written address interpretation technology into the united states postal service remote computer reader system. In: Proceedings of the 4th International Conference on Document Analysis and Recognition, ICDAR ’97. Washington: IEEE Computer Society: 1997. p. 892–6.
- Not checked yetcites [3] ACM Special Interest Group on KDD. KDD cup archives. 2016. http://www.kdd.org/kdd-cup . Accessed 22 Nov 2017.
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The 21st century began with a new wave of increasing interest in SVM and ensemble learning, and in particular ensemble DT.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 2.6 Evolution of machine learning techniques
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“SVM-based classifiers find a hyperplane to discriminate between categories.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 2.6 Evolution of machine learning techniques
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“MART and XGBoost are respectively a commercial and open source implementation of Friedman's Gradient Boosting Decision Tree (GBDT) algorithm; an ensemble DT algorithm based on gradient boosting [154,155].”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 2.6 Evolution of machine learning techniques
What the sources say
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Bioinspired optimization algorithms, such as Genetic Algorithms (GA) and Particle Swarm Optimization (PSO), received increasing attention and were used to train NNs for improved performance over the traditional BP-based learning [234,319].”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 2.6 Evolution of machine learning techniques
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [234] Kennedy J, Eberhart R. Particle swarm optimization. In: Neural Networks, 1995. Proceedings., IEEE International Conference on, vol 4.1995. p. 1942–8. source
- Not checked yetcites [319] Montana DJ, Davis L. Training feedforward neural networks using genetic algorithms. In: Proceedings of the 11th International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence - Volume 1, Morgan Kaufmann Publishers Inc., San Francisco, CA, USA, IJCAI’89.1989. p. 762–7.
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“In addition, some variants of the original boosting algorithm were also developed, such as Adaptive Boosting (AdaBoost) [153] and Stochastic Gradient Boosting (SGBoost) [155].”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 2.6 Evolution of machine learning techniques
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [153] Freund Y, Schapire RE. Experiments with a new boosting algorithm. In: Proceedings of the Thirteenth International Conference on International Conference on Machine Learning, ICML’96. San Francisco: Morgan Kaufmann Publishers Inc.: 1996. p. 148–56.
- Not checked yetcites [155] Friedman JH. Stochastic gradient boosting. Comput Stat Data Anal. 2002; 38(4):367–78. source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“The first instances of ensemble learning include Weighted Majority Algorithm (WMA) [279], boosting [403], bootstrap aggregating (or bagging) [75], and Random Forests (RF) [191].”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 2.6 Evolution of machine learning techniques
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [279] Littlestone N, Warmuth MK. The weighted majority algorithm. In: 30th Annual Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science.1989. p. 256–61. source
- Not checked yetcites [403] Schapire RE. The strength of weak learnability. Mach Learn. 1990; 5(2):197–227.
- Not checked yetcites [75] Breiman L. Bagging predictors. Mach Learn. 1996; 24(2):123–40.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“SVM has been widely used primarily for classification, although a regression variant exists, known as Support Vector Regression (SVR) [70].”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 2.6 Evolution of machine learning techniques
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [70] Boser BE, Guyon IM, Vapnik VN. A training algorithm for optimal margin classifiers. In: Proceedings of the Fifth Annual Workshop on Computational Learning Theory, ACM, New York, NY, USA, COLT ’92. New York: ACM: 1992. p. 144–52.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“A multi-class approach in SVM can be formulated as a series of single class classifiers, where the data is assigned to the class that maximizes an output function.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 2.6 Evolution of machine learning techniques
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Another well-known ML technique introduced in the 1990s was Support Vector Machines (SVM).”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 2.6 Evolution of machine learning techniques
boosted- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
In the paper
“In DT research, Quinlan published the M5 algorithm in 1992 [375] to construct tree-based multivariate linear models analogous to piecewise linear functions.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 2.6 Evolution of machine learning techniques
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [375] Quinlan JR. Learning with continuous classes. In: Proceedings of Australian Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, World Scientific.1992. p. 343–8.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“RF focused explicitly on tree models and marked the beginning of a new generation of ensemble DT.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 2.6 Evolution of machine learning techniques
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [191] Ho TK. Random decision forests. In: Proceedings of the Third International Conference on Document Analysis and Recognition (Volume 1) - Volume 1, IEEE Computer Society, Washington, DC, USA, ICDAR ’95. Piscataway: IEEE: 1995. p. 278.
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Unlike Q-learning, SARSA does not update the Q-value of an action based on the maximum action-value of the next state, but instead it uses the Q-value of the action chosen in the next state.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 2.6 Evolution of machine learning techniques
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Today, LSTM is widely used in speech recognition as well as natural language processing.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 2.6 Evolution of machine learning techniques
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Furthermore, from a conceptual perspective, Tom Mitchell formally defined ML: “A computer program is said to learn from experience E with respect to some class of tasks T and performance measure P, if its performance at tasks in T, as measured by P, improves with experience E” [317].”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 2.6 Evolution of machine learning techniques
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [317] Mitchell TM. Machine Learning, 1st ed. New York: McGraw-Hill, Inc.; 1997.
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“In the area of RL, SARSA (State-Action-Reward-State-Action) was introduced as a more realistic, however less practical, Q-learning variation [395].”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 2.6 Evolution of machine learning techniques
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [395] Rummery GA, Niranjan M. On-line Q-learning using connectionist systems. CUED/F-INFENG/TR 166, Cambridge University Engineering Department. 1994.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“C4.5 is to date one of the most important and widely used algorithms in ML and data mining.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 2.6 Evolution of machine learning techniques
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
In the paper
“The latter represented a great shift to data-driven ML, and since then it has been applied in many areas (e.g., retail, finance, manufacturing, medicine, science) for processing huge amounts of data to build models with valuable use [169].”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 2.6 Evolution of machine learning techniques
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [169] Goodfellow I, Bengio Y, Courville A. Deep Learning.MIT Press; 2016. http://www.deeplearningbook.org .
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“A year later, Quinlan published C4.5 [376], that builds on and extends ID3 to address most of its practical shortcomings, including data overfitting and training with missing values.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 2.6 Evolution of machine learning techniques
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [376] Quinlan JR. C4.5: Programs for Machine Learning. San Francisco: Morgan Kaufmann Publishers Inc.; 1993.
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“A new emerging concept called ensemble learning demonstrated that the predictive performance of a single learning model can be be improved when combined with other models [397].”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 2.6 Evolution of machine learning techniques
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [397] Russell S, Norvig P. Artificial Intelligence: A Modern Approach, 3rd ed. Upper Saddle River: Prentice Hall Press; 2009.
boosteddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“Probably one of the most important achievements in NNs was the work on Long Short-Term Memory (LSTM), an RNN capable of learning long-term dependencies for solving DL tasks that involve long input sequences [192].”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 2.6 Evolution of machine learning techniques
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [192] Hochreiter S, Schmidhuber J. Long short-term memory. Neural Comput. 1997; 9(8):1735–80. source
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Generally, the ARIMA model is a popular approach for TSF, where autoregressive (AR) and moving average (MA) models are applied in tandem to perform auto-regression on the differenced and “stationarized” data.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 3 Traffic prediction
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Existing TSF models for traffic prediction can be broadly decomposed into statistical analysis models and supervised ML models.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 3 Traffic prediction
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“It entails forecasting future traffic and traditionally has been addressed via time series forecasting (TSF).”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 3 Traffic prediction
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“[141] propose a MLP-NN-based bandwidth prediction system for Grid environments and compare it to the Network Weather Service (NWS) [480] bandwidth forecasting AR models for traffic monitoring and measurement.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 3.1 Traffic prediction as a pure TSF problem
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [141] Eswaradass A, Sun XH, Wu M. Network bandwidth predictor (nbp): A system for online network performance forecasting. In: Proceedings of 6th IEEE International Symposium on Cluster Computing and the Grid (CCGRID). IEEE: 2006. p. 4–pp. source
- Not checked yetcites [480] Wolski R. Dynamically forecasting network performance using the network weather service. Cluster Comput. 1998; 1(1):119–32. source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Their primary motive was to improve accuracy over traditional AR methods.This was supported by rigorous independent mathematical proofs published in the late eighties and the early nineties by Cybenko [106], Hornik [196], and Funahashi [158].”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 3.1 Traffic prediction as a pure TSF problem
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [106] Cybenko G. Approximation by superpositions of a sigmoidal function. Mathematics of Control. Signals Syst (MCSS). 1989; 2(4):303–14. source
- Not checked yetcites [196] Hornik K. Approximation capabilities of multilayer feedforward networks. Neural Netw. 1991; 4(2):251–7. source
- Not checked yetcites [158] Funahashi KI. On the approximate realization of continuous mappings by neural networks. Neural netw. 1989; 2(3):183–92. source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“More recently, efforts have been made to reduce overhead and, or improve accuracy in traffic prediction by employing features from flows, other than traffic volume.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 3 Traffic prediction
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“However, no details are provided for the characteristics of the MLP employed in the study, nor the time complexity of the system compared to NWS.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 3.1 Traffic prediction as a pure TSF problem
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Statistical analysis models are typically built upon the generalized autoregressive integrated moving average (ARIMA) model, while majority of learning for traffic prediction is achieved via supervised NNs.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 3 Traffic prediction
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Extra-trees stands for extremely randomized trees, an ensemble DT algorithm that builds random trees based on k randomly chosen features.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 2.6 Evolution of machine learning techniques
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Hinton's work on Deep Belief Networks (DBN), published in 2006 [188], gave a new breath and strength to research in DNNs.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 2.6 Evolution of machine learning techniques
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [188] Hinton GE, Osindero S, Teh YW. A fast learning algorithm for deep belief nets. Neural Comput. 2006; 18(7):1527–54. source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Although the term Deep RL was coined recently, this concept was already discussed and applied 25 years ago [275,440].”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 2.6 Evolution of machine learning techniques
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [275] Lin LJ. Reinforcement learning for robots using neural networks. PhD thesis. Pittsburgh, PA, USA: Carnegie Mellon University; 1992. uMI Order No. GAX93-22750.
- Not checked yetcites [440] Tesauro G. Practical issues in temporal difference learning. Mach Learn. 1992; 8(3):257–77.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“40 gigabit/s NSF TeraGrid network datasets show that the NN outperforms the NWS bandwidth forecasting models with an error rate of up to 8 and 121.9% for MLP-NN and NWS, respectively.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 3.1 Traffic prediction as a pure TSF problem
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [141] Eswaradass A, Sun XH, Wu M. Network bandwidth predictor (nbp): A system for online network performance forecasting. In: Proceedings of 6th IEEE International Symposium on Cluster Computing and the Grid (CCGRID). IEEE: 2006. p. 4–pp. source
- Not checked yetcites [480] Wolski R. Dynamically forecasting network performance using the network weather service. Cluster Comput. 1998; 1(1):119–32. source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one. The quote only partly states this claim.
In the paper
“It is important to mention that the evolution in ML research has enabled improved learning capabilities which were found useful in several application domains, ranging from games, image and speech recognition, network operation and management, to self-driving cars [120].”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 2.6 Evolution of machine learning techniques
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [120] Domingos P. The Master Algorithm: How the Quest for the Ultimate Learning Machine Will Remake Our World.Basic Books; 2015.
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“Chabaa et al. [86] evaluate the performance of various BP training algorithms to adjust the weights in the MLP-NN, when applied to Internet traffic time series.They show superior performance, with respect to RMSE and RPE, of the Levenberg-Marquardt (LM) and the Resilient backpropagation (Rp) algorithms over other BP algorithms.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 3.1 Traffic prediction as a pure TSF problem
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [86] Chabaa S, Zeroual A, Antari J. Identification and prediction of internet traffic using artificial neural networks. J Int Learn Syst Appl. 2010; 2(03):147.
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“At the same time, the popularity of DL increased significantly after the term “deep learning” was first introduced in the context of NNs in 2000 [9].”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 2.6 Evolution of machine learning techniques
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [9] Aizenberg IN, Aizenberg NN, Vandewalle JP. Multi-Valued and Universal Binary Neurons: Theory, Learning and Applications. Norwell: Kluwer Academic Publishers; 2000. source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The objective in TSF is to construct a regression model capable of drawing accurate correlation between future traffic volume and previously observed traffic volumes.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 3 Traffic prediction
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Indeed the proposed NN-based forecasting system shows better learning ability than NWS's.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 3.1 Traffic prediction as a pure TSF problem
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“This wave of popularity in deep learning has continued to this day, yielding major research advances over the years.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 2.6 Evolution of machine learning techniques
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Network traffic prediction plays a key role in network operations and management for today's increasingly complex and diverse networks.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 3 Traffic prediction
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“However, with the rapid growth of networks and increasing complexity of network traffic, traditional TSF models are seemingly compromised, giving rise to more advanced ML models.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 3 Traffic prediction
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Cortez et al. [104] choose to use a NN ensemble (NNE) of five MLP-NN with one hidden layer each.Resilient backpropagation (Rp) training is used on SNMP traffic data collected from two different ISP networks.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 3.1 Traffic prediction as a pure TSF problem
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [104] Cortez P, Rio M, Rocha M, Sousa P. Internet traffic forecasting using neural networks. In: Proceedings of IEEE International Joint Conference on Neural Networks (IJCNN). IEEE: 2006. p. 2635–42. source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“However instead to computing an optimal splitpoint for each one of the k features at each node as in RF, extra-trees selects a split-point randomly for reduced computational complexity.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 2.6 Evolution of machine learning techniques
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“However, the attractiveness of DNN started decreasing shortly after due to the experienced difficulty of training DNNs using BP (e.g.vanishing gradient problem), in addition to the increasing competitiveness of other ML techniques (e.g.SVM) [169].”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 2.6 Evolution of machine learning techniques
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [169] Goodfellow I, Bengio Y, Courville A. Deep Learning.MIT Press; 2016. http://www.deeplearningbook.org .
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“It also shows that in terms of time and computational complexity, NNE outperforms the other methods with an order of magnitude, and is well suited for real-time forecasting.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 3.1 Traffic prediction as a pure TSF problem
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [104] Cortez P, Rio M, Rocha M, Sousa P. Internet traffic forecasting using neural networks. In: Proceedings of IEEE International Joint Conference on Neural Networks (IJCNN). IEEE: 2006. p. 2635–42. source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“For example, Deep Q-Networks (DQN) -a combination of DNN and Qlearning-was proposed for mastering video games [318].”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 2.6 Evolution of machine learning techniques
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [318] Mnih V, Kavukcuoglu K, Silver D, Rusu AA, Veness J, Bellemare MG, Graves A, Riedmiller M, Fidjeland AK, Ostrovski G, Petersen S, Beattie C, Sadik A, Antonoglou I, King H, Kumaran D, Wierstra D, Legg S, Hassabis D. Human-level control through deep reinforcement learning. Nature. 2015; 518(7540):529–33. source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“DBN introduced an efficient training strategy for deep learning models, which was further used successfully in different classes of DNNs [49,381].”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 2.6 Evolution of machine learning techniques
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [49] Bengio Y, Lamblin P, Popovici D, Larochelle H. Greedy layer-wise training of deep networks. In: Proceedings of the 19th, International Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems. NIPS’06. Cambridge: MIT Press: 2006. p. 153–60.
- Not checked yetcites [381] Ranzato M, Poultney C, Chopra S, LeCun Y. Efficient learning of sparse representations with an energy-based model. In: Proceedings of the 19th International Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, USA, NIPS’06: 2006. p. 1137–44. source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“The development in ML -particularly, in DNNs-grew exponentially with advances in storage capacity and largescale data processing (i.e.Big Data) [169].”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 2.6 Evolution of machine learning techniques
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [169] Goodfellow I, Bengio Y, Courville A. Deep Learning.MIT Press; 2016. http://www.deeplearningbook.org .
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“One approach that is currently receiving tremendous attention is Deep RL, which incorporates deep learning models into RL for solving complex problems.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 2.6 Evolution of machine learning techniques
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“In contrast to the local optimization in BP, Zhu et al. [500] propose a hybrid training algorithm that is based on global optimization, the PSO-ABC technique [98].It is an artificial bee colony (ABC) algorithm employing particle swarm optimization (PSO), an evolutionary search algorithm.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 3.1 Traffic prediction as a pure TSF problem
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [500] Zhu Y, Zhang G, Qiu J. Network traffic prediction based on particle swarm bp neural network. JNW. 2013; 8(11):2685–91.
- Not checked yetcites [98] Chun-Feng W, Kui L, Pei-Ping S. Hybrid artificial bee colony algorithm and particle swarm search for global optimization. Math Probl Eng. 2014;2014. source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“For instance, Li et al. [274] propose a frequency domain based method for network traffic flows, instead of just traffic volume.The focus is on predicting incoming and outgoing traffic volume on an inter-data center link dominated by elephant flows.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 3.2 Traffic prediction as a non-TSF problem
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [274] Li Y, Liu H, Yang W, Hu D, Xu W. Inter-data-center network traffic prediction with elephant flows: IEEE; 2016b, pp. 206–13. source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“They propose a HMM to describe the relationship between the flow count, flow volume and their temporal dynamic behavior.The Kernel Bayes Rule (KBR) and RNN with LSTM unit is used to predict future traffic volume based on current flow count.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 3.2 Traffic prediction as a non-TSF problem
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [94] Chen Z, Wen J, Geng Y. Predicting future traffic using hidden markov models. In: Proceddings of 24th IEEE International Conference on Network Protocols (ICNP). IEEE: 2016. p. 1–6. source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Most importantly, SVR is able to achieve 9000 forecast per sec with 10 input samples, and shows the potential for real-time operation.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 3.1 Traffic prediction as a pure TSF problem
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [52] Bermolen P, Rossi D. Support vector regression for link load prediction. Comput Netw. 2009; 53(2):191–201. source
plaindirectn = 10- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Chen et al. [94], investigate the possibility of reducing cost of monitoring and collecting traffic volume, by inferring future traffic volume based on flow count only.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 3.2 Traffic prediction as a non-TSF problem
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [94] Chen Z, Wen J, Geng Y. Predicting future traffic using hidden markov models. In: Proceddings of 24th IEEE International Conference on Network Protocols (ICNP). IEEE: 2016. p. 1–6. source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“However, collecting all elephant flows at high frequencies is more expensive than byte count for traffic volume.Therefore, elephant flow information is collected at lower frequencies and interpolated to fill in the missing values, overcoming the overhead for elephant flow collection.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 3.2 Traffic prediction as a non-TSF problem
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Although NN outperforms GPR in terms of robustness to class imbalance by looking at the consistency of its TPR with varying flow size threshold, it has the lowest average TNR of below 80% in all datasets.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 3.2 Traffic prediction as a non-TSF problem
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [365] Poupart P, Chen Z, Jaini P, Fung F, Susanto H, Geng Y, Chen L, Chen K, Jin H. Online flow size prediction for improved network routing.IEEE; 2016, pp. 1–6. source
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“At 1sec timescale, the SVR model shows a slight improvement over an AR model in terms of RMSE.A more significant 10% improvement is achieved over a MA model.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 3.1 Traffic prediction as a pure TSF problem
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [52] Bermolen P, Rossi D. Support vector regression for link load prediction. Comput Netw. 2009; 53(2):191–201. source
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“However, the model does not seem to be fully considering the features related to the elephant flow, which may explain the inexplicable good performance of the 0-interpolation, a simple method that fills zeros for all unknown points.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 3.2 Traffic prediction as a non-TSF problem
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“On the other hand, SVM has a low computational overhead and is more robust to parameter variations (e.g.time scale, number of samples) in general.However, they are usually applied to classification rather than TSF.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 3.1 Traffic prediction as a pure TSF problem
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“As the detection flow size threshold increases, less flows are tagged as elephant flows, creating class imbalance in the training dataset and leading to lower TPR.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 3.2 Traffic prediction as a non-TSF problem
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“It is also noticed that considering the size of the first three packets alone leads to over 13.5% improvement, regardless of whether GPR or oBMM is used, with a very slight impact on the completion time of mice flows.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 3.2 Traffic prediction as a non-TSF problem
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [365] Poupart P, Chen Z, Jaini P, Fung F, Susanto H, Geng Y, Chen L, Chen K, Jin H. Online flow size prediction for improved network routing.IEEE; 2016, pp. 1–6. source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- The authors state this as an assumption: Mice flows are routed through Equal-cost multi-path routing, while elephant flows are routed through the least congested path.
In the paper
“Experiments on a 2 weeks hourly traffic measurement dataset show that PSO-ABC has higher prediction accuracy than BP, with an MSE of 0.006 and 0.011, respectively, on normalized data and has stable prediction performance.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 3.1 Traffic prediction as a pure TSF problem
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [500] Zhu Y, Zhang G, Qiu J. Network traffic prediction based on particle swarm bp neural network. JNW. 2013; 8(11):2685–91.
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Their models incorporate FNN, trained with BP using simple gradient descent and wavelet transform to capture both the time and frequency features of the traffic time series.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 3.2 Traffic prediction as a non-TSF problem
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Although oBMM outperforms all other approaches in one dataset with an average TPR and TNR very close to 100%, it fails miserably in the other datasets with an average TPR below 50% for one dataset.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 3.2 Traffic prediction as a non-TSF problem
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [365] Poupart P, Chen Z, Jaini P, Fung F, Susanto H, Geng Y, Chen L, Chen K, Jin H. Online flow size prediction for improved network routing.IEEE; 2016, pp. 1–6. source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“The RNN shows a prediction MSE of 0.3 at best, 0.05 higher than KBR and twice as much as the prediction error of an RNN fed with traffic volume instead of flow count.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 3.2 Traffic prediction as a non-TSF problem
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [94] Chen Z, Wen J, Geng Y. Predicting future traffic using hidden markov models. In: Proceddings of 24th IEEE International Conference on Network Protocols (ICNP). IEEE: 2016. p. 1–6. source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Poupart et al. [365] explore the use of different ML techniques for flow size prediction and elephant flow detection.These techniques include gaussian processes regression (GPR), online bayesian moment matching (oBMM) and a (106, 60, 40, 1) MLP-NN.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 3.2 Traffic prediction as a non-TSF problem
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [365] Poupart P, Chen Z, Jaini P, Fung F, Susanto H, Geng Y, Chen L, Chen K, Jin H. Online flow size prediction for improved network routing.IEEE; 2016, pp. 1–6. source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Because it might not be possible to have the appropriate counter in place, or because it might be technically difficult to conduct measurements at the required speed or granularity, non-TSF approaches can be useful.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 3.3 Summary
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“This motivates the need for ensemble learning.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 3.3 Summary
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence.
In the paper
“According to [365] a more complex MLP-NN (in terms of number of layers and neurons) might be required to achieve better accuracy in a non-TSF setting, and the performance of supervised learning techniques varies when tested on different datasets.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 3.3 Summary
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [365] Poupart P, Chen Z, Jaini P, Fung F, Susanto H, Geng Y, Chen L, Chen K, Jin H. Online flow size prediction for improved network routing.IEEE; 2016, pp. 1–6. source
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Traffic classification requires the ability to accurately associate network traffic to pre-defined classes of interest.These classes of interest can be classes of applications (e.g.HTTP, FTP, WWW, DNS and P2P), applications (e.g.Skype [310], YouTube [488] and Netflix [331]), or class of service [390].”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 4 Traffic classification
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [310] Microsoft Corporation. Skype. 2017. https://www.skype.com/ . Accessed 01 Aug 2017.
- Not checked yetcites [488] YouTube LLC. YouTube. 2017. https://www.youtube.com/ . Accessed 01 Aug 2017.
- Not checked yetcites [331] Netflix Inc. Netflix. 2017. https://www.netflix.com/ . Accessed 01 Aug 2017.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Furthermore, with the rise in security and privacy concerns, payload is often encrypted and its access is prohibited due to privacy laws.This makes it non-trivial to infer a signature for an application class using payload [54,138].”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 4.1 Payload-based traffic classification
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [54] Bernaille L, Teixeira R. Implementation issues of early application identification. Lect Notes Compu Sci. 2007; 4866:156. source
- Not checked yetcites [138] Erman J, Mahanti A, Arlitt M, Williamson C. Identifying and discriminating between web and peer-to-peer traffic in the network core. In: Proceedings of the 16th international conference on World Wide Web. ACM: 2007b. p. 883–92. source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Traffic classification is quintessential for network operators to perform a wide range of network operation and management activities.These include capacity planning, security and intrusion detection, QoS and service differentiation, performance monitoring, and resource provisioning, to name a few.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 4 Traffic classification
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Payload-based traffic classification is an alternate to portbased traffic classification.However, since it searches through the payload for known application signatures, it incurs higher computation and storage costs.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 4.1 Payload-based traffic classification
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Haffner et al. [176] reduce the computational overhead by using only the first few bytes of unidirectional, unencrypted TCP flows as binary feature vectors.For SSH and HTTPS encrypted traffic, they extract features from the unencrypted handshake that negotiate the encryption parameters of the TCP connection.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 4.1 Payload-based traffic classification
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [176] Haffner P, Sen S, Spatscheck O, Wang D. Acas: automated construction of application signatures. In: Proceedings of the 2005 ACM SIGCOMM workshop on Mining network data. New York: ACM: 2005. p. 197–202.
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Unfortunately, TSF approaches are restrictive in general.In fact they are only possible if past observations on the prediction variable are made.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 3.3 Summary
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Although higher prediction error rates are experienced, these rates remain relatively low not only for NNs but also for other supervised learning techniques, such as GPR and oBMM.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 3.3 Summary
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“They use NB, AdaBoost and MaxEnt for traffic classification.AdaBoost outperforms NB and MaxEnt, and yields an overall precision of 99% with an error rate within 0.5%.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 4.1 Payload-based traffic classification
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [176] Haffner P, Sen S, Spatscheck O, Wang D. Acas: automated construction of application signatures. In: Proceedings of the 2005 ACM SIGCOMM workshop on Mining network data. New York: ACM: 2005. p. 197–202.
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“In evaluation, the PD-based protocol models resulted in the lowest total misclassification error, under 5%.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 4.1 Payload-based traffic classification
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [286] Ma J, Levchenko K, Kreibich C, Savage S, Voelker GM. Unexpected means of protocol inference. In: Proceedings of the 6th ACM SIGCOMM conference on Internet measurement.2006. p. 313–26. source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one. The quote only partly states this claim.
In the paper
“In this way, NBKE with FCBF achieves a classification accuracy of upto 95% and TPR of upto 99%.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 4.3.1 Supervised complete flow feature-based traffic classification
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [321] Moore AW, Zuev D. Internet traffic classification using bayesian analysis techniques. In: ACM SIGMETRICS Performance Evaluation Review, ACM, vol 33.2005. p. 50–60. source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“In their evaluation, k-NN outperforms LDA with the lowest error rate of 5.1 and 9.4% for four and seven class classification, respectively.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 4.3.1 Supervised complete flow feature-based traffic classification
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [390] Roughan M, Sen S, Spatscheck O, Duffield N. Class-of-service mapping for qos: a statistical signature-based approach to ip traffic classification. In: Proceedings of the 4th ACM SIGCOMM conference on Internet measurement. ACM: 2004a. p. 135–148. source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“However, they observe that the average packet size and flow duration act as good discriminators, hence used these in their preliminary evaluation.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 4.3.1 Supervised complete flow feature-based traffic classification
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [390] Roughan M, Sen S, Spatscheck O, Duffield N. Class-of-service mapping for qos: a statistical signature-based approach to ip traffic classification. In: Proceedings of the 4th ACM SIGCOMM conference on Internet measurement. ACM: 2004a. p. 135–148. source
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“Using 5-fold cross validation, the classifier achieves an average accuracy of 93.2% and a precision of 79.2%.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > Schatzmann et al.
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [404] Schatzmann D, Mühlbauer W, Spyropoulos T, Dimitropoulos X. Digging into https: Flow-based classification of webmail traffic. In: Proceedings of the 10th ACM SIGCOMM Conference on Internet Measurement: 2010. p. 322–27. source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Both of these assumptions are unrealistic for traffic classification and lead to poor accuracy.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 4.3.1 Supervised complete flow feature-based traffic classification
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“However, FP are more sensitive to the window size, and reduce below 5% only for window sizes over 80.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 4.1 Payload-based traffic classification
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [146] Finamore A, Mellia M, Meo M, Rossi D. Kiss: Stochastic packet inspection classifier for udp traffic. IEEE/ACM Trans Netw. 2010; 18(5):1505–15. source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“These classifiers rely on the notion that applications generate different communication patterns.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 4.2 Host behavior-based traffic classification
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Though, NB classifiers have been commonly used in classification, they have two fundamental assumptions, (i) probability of occurrence of each feature being independent from the occurrence of another feature, and (ii) probability distribution of a feature following a Gaussian distribution.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 4.3.1 Supervised complete flow feature-based traffic classification
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“REPTree achieves over 90% accuracy in classification of unidirectional flows and plateaus at seven features.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 4.3.1 Supervised complete flow feature-based traffic classification
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [347] Park J, Tyan HR, Kuo CCJ. Internet traffic classification for scalable qos provision. In: Multimedia and Expo, vol 2006 IEEE International Conference on. IEEE: 2006. p. 1221–4. source
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Despite the disadvantages of payload-based classification techniques, the payload-based classifiers achieve high accuracy and are often employed to establish ground truth [55].”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 4.1 Payload-based traffic classification
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [55] Bernaille L, Teixeira R, Akodkenou I, Soule A, Salamatian K. Traffic classification on the fly. ACM SIGCOMM Comput Commun Rev. 2006a; 36(2):23–6. source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“However, DT performs better than NBKE, with respect to execution time and space in memory [347].”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 4.3.1 Supervised complete flow feature-based traffic classification
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [347] Park J, Tyan HR, Kuo CCJ. Internet traffic classification for scalable qos provision. In: Multimedia and Expo, vol 2006 IEEE International Conference on. IEEE: 2006. p. 1221–4. source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“The classifier results in a worst-case TPR of about 95%, with FPR well below 0.1%.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > Schatzmann et al.
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [53] Bermolen P, Mellia M, Meo M, Rossi D, Valenti S. Abacus: Accurate behavioral classification of P2P-tv traffic. Comput Netw. 2011; 55(6):1394–411. source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“However, NBKE is a feasible alternate that generalizes NB and overcomes the Gaussian distribution approximation assumption.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 4.3.1 Supervised complete flow feature-based traffic classification
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [321] Moore AW, Zuev D. Internet traffic classification using bayesian analysis techniques. In: ACM SIGMETRICS Performance Evaluation Review, ACM, vol 33.2005. p. 50–60. source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“For example, the F-measure of BoF-NB with the sum rule is over 15 and 10% higher than NB for DNS and POP3, respectively.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 4.3.1 Supervised complete flow feature-based traffic classification
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [496] Zhang J, Chen C, Xiang Y, Zhou W, Xiang Y. Internet traffic classification by aggregating correlated naive bayes predictions. IEEE Trans Inf Forensic Secur. 2013; 8(1):5–15. source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“They perform their evaluations on WEKA [288], and find C4.5 DT to outperform C4.5 DT with AdaBoost and NBKE.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > Erman et al.
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [270] Li W, Moore AW. A machine learning approach for efficient traffic classification. In: Modeling, Analysis, and Simulation of Computer and Telecommunication Systems, 2007. MASCOTS’07. 15th International, Symposium on. IEEE: 2007. p. 310–7. source
- Not checked yetcites [288] Machine Learning Group, University of Waikato. WEKA. 2017. http://www.cs.waikato.ac.nz/ml/weka/ . Accessed 01 Aug 2017.
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“Their approach uniquely trains the ML model for the application class “Attack”, that enables early detection and classification of anomalous traffic.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > Erman et al.
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [270] Li W, Moore AW. A machine learning approach for efficient traffic classification. In: Modeling, Analysis, and Simulation of Computer and Telecommunication Systems, 2007. MASCOTS’07. 15th International, Symposium on. IEEE: 2007. p. 310–7. source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“A significant increase in the average distance of new flows to their nearest cluster mean is indicative of the need for retraining, which could be achieved by incremental learning.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > Erman et al.
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [137] Erman J, Mahanti A, Arlitt M, Cohen I, Williamson C. Offline/realtime traffic classification using semi-supervised learning. Perform Eval. 2007a; 64(9):1194–213. source
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Evidently, supervised learning yields high classification accuracy, due to a priori information about the characteristics of the classes of interest.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 4.3.1 Supervised complete flow feature-based traffic classification
boosteddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“This approach not only has a small memory footprint, it allows to update the model and potentially improve classification performance [137].”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > Erman et al.
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [137] Erman J, Mahanti A, Arlitt M, Cohen I, Williamson C. Offline/realtime traffic classification using semi-supervised learning. Perform Eval. 2007a; 64(9):1194–213. source
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Evidently, the accuracy increases and error sensitivity decreases as the size of BoFs increase, due to the growth in BoF intra-diversity [496].”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 4.3.1 Supervised complete flow feature-based traffic classification
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [496] Zhang J, Chen C, Xiang Y, Zhou W, Xiang Y. Internet traffic classification by aggregating correlated naive bayes predictions. IEEE Trans Inf Forensic Secur. 2013; 8(1):5–15. source
boosteddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Their MLP-NN with Bayesian trained weights (BNN) also increases the temporal accuracy of the classifier to 95%.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > Zhang et al.
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [26] Auld T, Moore AW, Gull SF. Bayesian neural networks for internet traffic classification. IEEE Trans neural networks. 2007; 18(1):223–39. source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“However, the C4.5 DT classifier performs better with 99.3% median recall and 97% median precision, and achieved 95.7% median recall and 99.2% median precision, for sub-flow size N = 25 packets for Enemy Territory and VoIP traffic, respectively.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 4.3.3 Early and sub-flow-based traffic classification
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [337] Nguyen TT, Armitage G, Branch P, Zander S. Timely and continuous machine-learning-based classification for interactive ip traffic. IEEE/ACM Trans Netw (TON). 2012; 20(6):1880–94. source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“The accuracy of traffic classification can be increased to over 99%, by using the discriminative MLP-NN classifier to assign membership probabilities to flows.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > Zhang et al.
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [26] Auld T, Moore AW, Gull SF. Bayesian neural networks for internet traffic classification. IEEE Trans neural networks. 2007; 18(1):223–39. source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“Furthermore, the use of port numbers in conjunction with other features results in a slightly higher accuracy.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > Erman et al.
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [270] Li W, Moore AW. A machine learning approach for efficient traffic classification. In: Modeling, Analysis, and Simulation of Computer and Telecommunication Systems, 2007. MASCOTS’07. 15th International, Symposium on. IEEE: 2007. p. 310–7. source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“With training and testing data collected two months apart from two different locations, result in low error rates of 3 and 0.4% for TCP and UDP traffic, respectively.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > Erman et al.
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [222] Jin Y, Duffield N, Erman J, Haffner P, Sen S, Zhang ZL. A modular machine learning system for flow-level traffic classification in large networks. ACM Trans Knowl Discov Data (TKDD). 2012; 6(1):4.
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Bonfiglio et al. [69] perform controlled experiments to reverse engineer the structure of Skype messages between two Skype clients (E2E) and between a Skype client and a traditional PSTN phone (E2O).”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 4.3.4 Encrypted traffic classification
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [69] Bonfiglio D, Mellia M, Meo M, Rossi D, Tofanelli P. Revealing skype traffic: when randomness plays with you. In: ACM SIGCOMM Computer Communication Review. ACM: 2007. p. 37–48. source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“However, higher FNs are noticeable in comparison to the isolated classifiers, as the combination disregards video and data transfers, and correctly identify only those Skype flows that actually carry voice traffic.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 4.3.4 Encrypted traffic classification
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [69] Bonfiglio D, Mellia M, Meo M, Rossi D, Tofanelli P. Revealing skype traffic: when randomness plays with you. In: ACM SIGCOMM Computer Communication Review. ACM: 2007. p. 37–48. source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“The classification accuracy of C4.5 DT with 0.5% randomly selected training flows, exceed 99% for most classes except Attack, which exhibits moderate-high recall.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > Erman et al.
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [270] Li W, Moore AW. A machine learning approach for efficient traffic classification. In: Modeling, Analysis, and Simulation of Computer and Telecommunication Systems, 2007. MASCOTS’07. 15th International, Symposium on. IEEE: 2007. p. 310–7. source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“The identification of Skype traffic at the flow level is also addressed in Alshammari et al. [17] by employing supervised AdaBoost, Repeated Incremental Pruning to Produce Error Reduction (RIPPER), SVM, NB and C4.5 DT classifiers.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 4.3.4 Encrypted traffic classification
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [17] Alshammari R, Zincir-Heywood AN. Machine learning based encrypted traffic classification: Identifying ssh and skype. In: Computational Intelligence for Security and Defense Applications, 2009. CISDA 2009. IEEE Symposium on. IEEE: 2009. p. 1–8. source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“By employing collective traffic statistics [221] via colored traffic activity graphs (TAGs) improves the accuracy for all traffic classes, reducing the overall error rate by 15%.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > Erman et al.
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [222] Jin Y, Duffield N, Erman J, Haffner P, Sen S, Zhang ZL. A modular machine learning system for flow-level traffic classification in large networks. ACM Trans Knowl Discov Data (TKDD). 2012; 6(1):4.
- Not checked yetcites [221] Jin Y, Duffield N, Haffner P, Sen S, Zhang ZL. Inferring applications at the network layer using collective traffic statistics. In: Teletraffic Congress (ITC), 2010 22nd International. IEEE: 2010. p. 1–8. source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“However, this leaves the classifier vulnerable to issues in port-based classification.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > Erman et al.
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [270] Li W, Moore AW. A machine learning approach for efficient traffic classification. In: Modeling, Analysis, and Simulation of Computer and Telecommunication Systems, 2007. MASCOTS’07. 15th International, Symposium on. IEEE: 2007. p. 310–7. source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“[409] by adopting a hierarchical classification to identify the service provider (e.g.google.com,dropbox.com),followed by the type of service (e.g.maps.google.com,drive.google.com) that are encapsulated in TLS-based HTTPS sessions.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 4.3.4 Encrypted traffic classification
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [409] Shbair WM, Cholez T, Francois J, Chrisment I. A multi-level framework to identify https services. In: IEEE/IFIP Network Operations and Management Symposium (NOMS)2016. p. 240–8. source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“This is because Attack is a complex application class that shows no temporal stability and its characteristics dynamically change over time.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > Erman et al.
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [270] Li W, Moore AW. A machine learning approach for efficient traffic classification. In: Modeling, Analysis, and Simulation of Computer and Telecommunication Systems, 2007. MASCOTS’07. 15th International, Symposium on. IEEE: 2007. p. 310–7. source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“[222] employ a supervised approach.They classify network traffic using complete flows, while achieving high accuracy, temporal and spatial stability, and scalability.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > Erman et al.
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [222] Jin Y, Duffield N, Erman J, Haffner P, Sen S, Zhang ZL. A modular machine learning system for flow-level traffic classification in large networks. ACM Trans Knowl Discov Data (TKDD). 2012; 6(1):4.
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“For SSH traffic, it achieves 95.9% DR and 2.8% FPR on the Dalhousie dataset, 97.2% DR and 0.8% FPR on the AMP dataset, and 82.9% DR and 0.5% FPR on the MAWI dataset.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 4.3.4 Encrypted traffic classification
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [17] Alshammari R, Zincir-Heywood AN. Machine learning based encrypted traffic classification: Identifying ssh and skype. In: Computational Intelligence for Security and Defense Applications, 2009. CISDA 2009. IEEE Symposium on. IEEE: 2009. p. 1–8. source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Though, nonuniform weighted threshold sampling creates smaller balanced training sets, it can distort the distribution of the data.This may violate the independent and identically distributed assumption held by most ML algorithms, invalidating the results of the binary classifiers.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > Erman et al.
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [222] Jin Y, Duffield N, Erman J, Haffner P, Sen S, Zhang ZL. A modular machine learning system for flow-level traffic classification in large networks. ACM Trans Knowl Discov Data (TKDD). 2012; 6(1):4.
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Furthermore, their system on a multi-core machine using multi-threads, was able to handle 6.5 million new flows arriving per minute.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > Erman et al.
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [222] Jin Y, Duffield N, Erman J, Haffner P, Sen S, Zhang ZL. A modular machine learning system for flow-level traffic classification in large networks. ACM Trans Knowl Discov Data (TKDD). 2012; 6(1):4.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“In the evaluation, the NB classifier is effective in identifying all voice traffic, while the χ 2 classifier accurately identifies all Skype traffic over UDP and all encrypted or compressed traffic over TCP.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 4.3.4 Encrypted traffic classification
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [69] Bonfiglio D, Mellia M, Meo M, Rossi D, Tofanelli P. Revealing skype traffic: when randomness plays with you. In: ACM SIGCOMM Computer Communication Review. ACM: 2007. p. 37–48. source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“In contrast, Wang et al. [462] propose a framework to classify network traffic to QoS classes rather than applications.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 4.3.5 NFV and SDN for traffic classification
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [462] Wang P, Lin SC, Luo M. A framework for qos-aware traffic classification using semi-supervised machine learning in sdns. In: Services Computing (SCC), 2016 IEEE International Conference on. IEEE: 2016. p. 760–5. source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- The authors state this as an assumption: Applications with similar QoS requirements exhibit similar statistical properties.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Though, traditional kernel estimation techniques are simple and effective, their underlying assumptions are unrealistic and infeasible for traffic classification.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 4.4 Summary
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In supervised learning, various kernel estimation, NN and SVM-based ML techniques have been employed to achieve high accuracy.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 4.4 Summary
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
The quote only partly states this claim.
In the paper
“However, this can be attributed to the fairly small training dataset used in their evaluation.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 4.3.5 NFV and SDN for traffic classification
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [19] Amaral P, Dinis J, Pinto P, Bernardo L, Tavares J, Mamede HS. Machine learning in software defined networks: Data collection and traffic classification. In: Network Protocols (ICNP), 2016 IEEE 24th International Conference on. IEEE: 2016. p. 1–5. source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“The Laplacian-SVM classifier employed uses flow features from the first twenty packets to classify flows into QoS classes.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 4.3.5 NFV and SDN for traffic classification
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [462] Wang P, Lin SC, Luo M. A framework for qos-aware traffic classification using semi-supervised machine learning in sdns. In: Services Computing (SCC), 2016 IEEE International Conference on. IEEE: 2016. p. 760–5. source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- The authors state this as an assumption: Applications with similar QoS requirements exhibit similar statistical properties.
In the paper
“Complete flow feature-based traffic classification has been shown to achieve high spatial and temporal stability, high classification accuracy, and training and runtime scalability [222].”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 4.4 Summary
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [222] Jin Y, Duffield N, Erman J, Haffner P, Sen S, Zhang ZL. A modular machine learning system for flow-level traffic classification in large networks. ACM Trans Knowl Discov Data (TKDD). 2012; 6(1):4.
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Amaral et al. [19] harness SDN and OF to monitor and classify TCP enterprise network traffic.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 4.3.5 NFV and SDN for traffic classification
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [19] Amaral P, Dinis J, Pinto P, Bernardo L, Tavares J, Mamede HS. Machine learning in software defined networks: Data collection and traffic classification. In: Network Protocols (ICNP), 2016 IEEE 24th International Conference on. IEEE: 2016. p. 1–5. source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“These sub-flows can be extended synthetically [55] or derived from a small sliding window over each flow [337].”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 4.4 Summary
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [55] Bernaille L, Teixeira R, Akodkenou I, Soule A, Salamatian K. Traffic classification on the fly. ACM SIGCOMM Comput Commun Rev. 2006a; 36(2):23–6. source
- Not checked yetcites [337] Nguyen TT, Armitage G, Branch P, Zander S. Timely and continuous machine-learning-based classification for interactive ip traffic. IEEE/ACM Trans Netw (TON). 2012; 20(6):1880–94. source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“This is the most widely studied technique for traffic classification that leverages both supervised and unsupervised ML.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 4.4 Summary
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Similarly, host-based traffic classification is highly susceptible to routing asymmetries.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 4.4 Summary
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In this light, NBKE has been explored for traffic classification, but NN-based traffic classification has shown higher accuracy with probabilistic and, or Bayesian trained weights.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 4.4 Summary
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Though, they are computationally intensive and complicated due to encryption, supervised and unsupervised ML has been successfully applied for traffic classification with high accuracy.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 4.4 Summary
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“The results exhibit high accuracy for some application classes (e.g.Web Browsing), while poor performance for others (e.g.LinkedIn).”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 4.3.5 NFV and SDN for traffic classification
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [19] Amaral P, Dinis J, Pinto P, Bernardo L, Tavares J, Mamede HS. Machine learning in software defined networks: Data collection and traffic classification. In: Network Protocols (ICNP), 2016 IEEE 24th International Conference on. IEEE: 2016. p. 1–5. source
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Also, overall accuracy of the system across both levels is 93.10% with a degradation of less than 20% over a period of 23 weeks without retraining.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 4.3.4 Encrypted traffic classification
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [409] Shbair WM, Cholez T, Francois J, Chrisment I. A multi-level framework to identify https services. In: IEEE/IFIP Network Operations and Management Symposium (NOMS)2016. p. 240–8. source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“On the other hand, soft clustering achieves the required granularity with density-based clustering techniques, which also has a lower training time than EM-based soft clustering technique.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 4.4 Summary
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“In the evaluation, the accuracy of classifying long-lived flows to QoS classes exceed 90%.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 4.3.5 NFV and SDN for traffic classification
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [462] Wang P, Lin SC, Luo M. A framework for qos-aware traffic classification using semi-supervised machine learning in sdns. In: Services Computing (SCC), 2016 IEEE International Conference on. IEEE: 2016. p. 760–5. source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- The authors state this as an assumption: Applications with similar QoS requirements exhibit similar statistical properties.
In the paper
“However, it requires extensive memory for storage and delays time sensitive classifier decisions.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 4.4 Summary
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [222] Jin Y, Duffield N, Erman J, Haffner P, Sen S, Zhang ZL. A modular machine learning system for flow-level traffic classification in large networks. ACM Trans Knowl Discov Data (TKDD). 2012; 6(1):4.
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“The adaptive selection of features and classifiers in vTC, based on the flow protocol, result in an accuracy of 95.6%.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 4.3.5 NFV and SDN for traffic classification
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [182] He L, Xu C, Luo Y. vtc: Machine learning based traffic classification as a virtual network function. In: Proceedings of the 2016 ACM International Workshop on Security in Software Defined Networks & Network Function Virtualization. ACM: 2016. p. 53–56. source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Rests on an assumption: The performance of classifiers varies significantly based on the type of flow features used.
- Rests on an assumption: Flows inherently exhibit specific characteristics of network applications and protocols.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“It was also found that, although Q-routing does no exploration or finetuning after policies and Q-values are learned, it still outperforms in a dynamically changing network topology, a full-echo Q-routing algorithm where the policy is dynamically adjusted to the current estimated time to destination.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 5 Traffic routing
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [71] Boyan JA, Littman ML. Packet routing in dynamically changing networks: A reinforcement learning approach. In: Advances in neural information processing systems: 1994. p. 671–8.
- Not checked yetcites [280] Littman M, Boyan J. A distributed reinforcement learning scheme for network routing. In: Proceedings of the international workshop on applications of neural networks to telecommunications. Psychology Press: 1993. p. 45–51.
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Though, some preliminary work in this area has achieved high accuracy, more scrutiny is required with respect to their resilience, temporal and spatial stability, and computational overhead.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 4.4 Summary
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Boyan and Littman's [71,280] seminal work introduced Q-routing, a straight-forward application of the Q-learning algorithm to packet routing.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 5 Traffic routing
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [71] Boyan JA, Littman ML. Packet routing in dynamically changing networks: A reinforcement learning approach. In: Advances in neural information processing systems: 1994. p. 671–8.
- Not checked yetcites [280] Littman M, Boyan J. A distributed reinforcement learning scheme for network routing. In: Proceedings of the international workshop on applications of neural networks to telecommunications. Psychology Press: 1993. p. 45–51.
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Recent advances in networking increase the opportunities in traffic classification with SDN-and NFV-based identification of applications and classes of QoS.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 4.4 Summary
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
In the paper
“In 1997, Kumar et al. apply dual reinforcement Q-routing (DRQ-Routing) to minimize packet delivery time [254].”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 5 Traffic routing
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [254] Kumar S, Miikkulainen R. Dual reinforcement q-routing: An on-line adaptive routing algorithm. In: Proceedings of the artificial neural networks in engineering Conference.1997. p. 231–8.
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Not only are semi-supervised classifiers resilient, they can be easily adapted for zero-day traffic or retrained for increased accuracy against previously unknown applications.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 4.4 Summary
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: unclear — It is unclear why the paper says it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In the existing literature, one family of ML techniques has dominated research in traffic routing, Reinforcement Learning.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 5 Traffic routing
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“In fact, under heavy load, the full-echo Q-routing algorithm constantly changes the routing policy creating bottlenecks in the network.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 5 Traffic routing
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [71] Boyan JA, Littman ML. Packet routing in dynamically changing networks: A reinforcement learning approach. In: Advances in neural information processing systems: 1994. p. 671–8.
- Not checked yetcites [280] Littman M, Boyan J. A distributed reinforcement learning scheme for network routing. In: Proceedings of the international workshop on applications of neural networks to telecommunications. Psychology Press: 1993. p. 45–51.
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Undoubtedly, supervised ML lends itself to accuracy in traffic classification, while unsupervised techniques are more robust.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 4.4 Summary
boosteddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“However, in practice this algorithm has high computational complexity considering the very large number of states to be explored, and high communication overhead as every routed packet is acknowledged back by the sink along the path from the source for reward computation.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 5 Traffic routing
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [424] Stone P. Tpot-rl applied to network routing. In: ICML.2000. p. 935–42. source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Indeed an exploration-free approach eventually leads to maximum routing performance since only actions with maximum Q-values are selected, however it reduces the protocol to a static approach that is insensitive to topology changes.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 5 Traffic routing
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [430] Sun R, Tatsumi S, Zhao G. Q-map: A novel multicast routing method in wireless ad hoc networks with multiagent reinforcement learning. In: TENCON’02. Proceedings. 2002 IEEE Region 10 Conference on Computers, Communications, Control and Power Engineering, vol 1. IEEE: 2002. p. 667–670.
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“This form of MARL is soft in that it is easy to implement and has low communication and computational complexity as opposed to the general more complex form of MARL like in [124, 425].”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 5 Traffic routing
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [124] Dowling J, Curran E, Cunningham R, Cahill V. Using feedback in collaborative reinforcement learning to adaptively optimize manet routing. IEEE Transactions on Systems. Man and Cybern-Part A: Syst Hum. 2005; 35(3):360–72.
- Not checked yetcites [425] Stone P, Veloso M. Team-partitioned, opaque-transition reinforcement learning. In: Proceedings of the third annual conference on Autonomous Agents. ACM: 1999. p. 206–12. source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“FROMS shows up to 5 times higher delivery rates than the popular directed diffusion algorithm [205] in the presence of node failure, and 20% less network overhead per packet due to route aggregation.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 5.1 Routing as a decentralized operation function
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [151] Forster A, Murphy AL. Froms: Feedback routing for optimizing multiple sinks in wsn with reinforcement learning. In: Intelligent Sensors, Sensor Networks and Information, 2007. ISSNIP 2007. 3rd International, Conference on. IEEE: 2007. p. 371–6. source
- Not checked yetcites [205] Intanagonwiwat C, Govindan R, Estrin D, Heidemann J, Silva F. Directed diffusion for wireless sensor networking. IEEE/ACM Trans Netw (ToN). 2003; 11(1):2–16. source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“In Q-MAP, Q-values are associated with different upstream nodes and the best Q-values are disseminated directly from the sinks to the nodes thus making exploration of routes unnecessary, while speeding up the convergence of the learning process.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 5 Traffic routing
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [430] Sun R, Tatsumi S, Zhao G. Q-map: A novel multicast routing method in wireless ad hoc networks with multiagent reinforcement learning. In: TENCON’02. Proceedings. 2002 IEEE Region 10 Conference on Computers, Communications, Control and Power Engineering, vol 1. IEEE: 2002. p. 667–670.
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Hu and Fei [197] propose QELAR, a model-based variant of the Q-routing algorithm, to provide faster convergence, route cost reduction, and energy preservation in underwater WSNs.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 5.1 Routing as a decentralized operation function
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [197] Hu T, Fei Y. Qelar: a machine-learning-based adaptive routing protocol for energy-efficient and lifetime-extended underwater sensor networks. IEEE Trans Mob Comput. 2010; 9(6):796–809. source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“Results show that Q-PR as well as EFE outperform GPSR in terms of successful delivery rate (over 98% against 75.66%).”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 5.1 Routing as a decentralized operation function
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [24] Arroyo-Valles R, Alaiz-Rodriguez R, Guerrero-Curieses A, Cid-Sueiro J. Q-probabilistic routing in wireless sensor networks. In: Intelligent Sensors, Sensor Networks and Information, 2007. ISSNIP 2007. 3rd International Conference on. IEEE: 2007. p. 1–6. source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“In [151], Forster et al. use a Q-learning approach in a multicast routing protocol, called FROMS (Feedback Routing for Optimizing Multiple Sinks).”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 5.1 Routing as a decentralized operation function
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [151] Forster A, Murphy AL. Froms: Feedback routing for optimizing multiple sinks in wsn with reinforcement learning. In: Intelligent Sensors, Sensor Networks and Information, 2007. ISSNIP 2007. 3rd International, Conference on. IEEE: 2007. p. 371–6. source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“In QELAR, rewards account for both the packet transmission energy (incurred for forwarding the packet to the neighbor node) and the neighbor node's residual energy.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 5.1 Routing as a decentralized operation function
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [197] Hu T, Fei Y. Qelar: a machine-learning-based adaptive routing protocol for energy-efficient and lifetime-extended underwater sensor networks. IEEE Trans Mob Comput. 2010; 9(6):796–809. source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“While PQ-routing shows better performance than Q-routing at lower-loads, DRQ-routing converges faster and the protocol shows better overall performance at the cost of slightly increased communication overhead due to backward rewards.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 5 Traffic routing
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [254] Kumar S, Miikkulainen R. Dual reinforcement q-routing: An on-line adaptive routing algorithm. In: Proceedings of the artificial neural networks in engineering Conference.1997. p. 231–8.
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“the proposed SARSA-based routing algorithm is not specific to such an architecture, and is meant to run on any controller that has global visibility of the different paths and links in the network.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 5.3 Routing as a centralized control function
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [276] Lin SC, Akyildiz IF, Wang P, Luo M. Qos-aware adaptive routing in multi-layer hierarchical software defined networks: a reinforcement learning approach. In: Services Computing (SCC) 2016, IEEE International Conference on. IEEE: 2016. p. 25–33. source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Compared to directed diffusion: • up to 5× higher delivery rate • ≈ 20% lower overhead Q-PR [24]”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 5.1 Routing as a decentralized operation function
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [24] Arroyo-Valles R, Alaiz-Rodriguez R, Guerrero-Curieses A, Cid-Sueiro J. Q-probabilistic routing in wireless sensor networks. In: Intelligent Sensors, Sensor Networks and Information, 2007. ISSNIP 2007. 3rd International Conference on. IEEE: 2007. p. 1–6. source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“Compared to Q-learning with QoS-awareness: • Faster convergence time (20 episodes less)”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 5.1 Routing as a decentralized operation function
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [276] Lin SC, Akyildiz IF, Wang P, Luo M. Qos-aware adaptive routing in multi-layer hierarchical software defined networks: a reinforcement learning approach. In: Services Computing (SCC) 2016, IEEE International Conference on. IEEE: 2016. p. 25–33. source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“It is suggested that the controller iterates the SARSA algorithm until convergence, which in practice results in delayed routing.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 5.3 Routing as a centralized control function
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“As the activity level reaches 2.75packet/s, over 3000 periods are necessary for DRQ-routing to converge.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > Xia et al.
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [482] Xia B, Wahab MH, Yang Y, Fan Z, Sooriyabandara M. Reinforcement learning based spectrum-aware routing in multi-hop cognitive radio networks. In: Cognitive Radio Oriented Wireless Networks and Communications, 2009. CROWNCOM’09. 4th International, Conference on. IEEE: 2009. p. 1–5. source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“After convergence (≈ 300sec) • ETX comparable to a topology-aware routing algorithm”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 5.1 Routing as a decentralized operation function
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [59] Bhorkar AA, Naghshvar M, Javidi T, Rao BD. Adaptive opportunistic routing for wireless ad hoc networks. IEEE/ACM Trans Netw. 2012; 20(1):243–56. source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“Whereas, both show comparable routing efficiency and delivery rates.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 5.1 Routing as a decentralized operation function
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [197] Hu T, Fei Y. Qelar: a machine-learning-based adaptive routing protocol for energy-efficient and lifetime-extended underwater sensor networks. IEEE Trans Mob Comput. 2010; 9(6):796–809. source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“> 30% improvement over greedy-SR, greedy ExOR and SRCR with a single flow”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 5.1 Routing as a decentralized operation function
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [59] Bhorkar AA, Naghshvar M, Javidi T, Rao BD. Adaptive opportunistic routing for wireless ad hoc networks. IEEE/ACM Trans Netw. 2012; 20(1):243–56. source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“Improvement decreases with # flows”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 5.1 Routing as a decentralized operation function
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [59] Bhorkar AA, Naghshvar M, Javidi T, Rao BD. Adaptive opportunistic routing for wireless ad hoc networks. IEEE/ACM Trans Netw. 2012; 20(1):243–56. source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“this comes at the price of higher computational complexity, and communication overhead due to the growing size of the packets at each hop and the broadcasting of Q-values”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 5.2 Routing as a partially decentralized operation function
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [461] Wang P, Wang T. Adaptive routing for sensor networks using reinforcement learning. In: Computer and Information Technology, 2006. CIT’06. The Sixth IEEE International Conference on. IEEE: 2006. p. 219. source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“the video quality, calculated in terms of peak signal-to-noise ratio (PSNR), is increased by 10%”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 5.1 Routing as a decentralized operation function
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [24] Arroyo-Valles R, Alaiz-Rodriguez R, Guerrero-Curieses A, Cid-Sueiro J. Q-probabilistic routing in wireless sensor networks. In: Intelligent Sensors, Sensor Networks and Information, 2007. ISSNIP 2007. 3rd International Conference on. IEEE: 2007. p. 1–6. source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
The quote only partly states this claim.
In the paper
“In [277] Lin and Schaar address the problem of routing delay-sensitive applications in the more general context of multi-hop wireless ad hoc networks.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 5.1 Routing as a decentralized operation function
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [277] Lin Z, van der Schaar M. Autonomic and distributed joint routing and power control for delay-sensitive applications in multi-hop wireless networks. IEEE Trans Wirel Commun. 2011; 10(1):102–13. source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“If the flow is an elephant flow, it may congest the links and severely impact the QoS of flows with tight delay requirements.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 5.3 Routing as a centralized control function
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
In the paper
“Tested with different network topologies and mobility models, SAMPLE shows better performance than the traditional AODV and DSR routing algorithms in terms of packet delivery ratio and throughput.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > Xia et al.
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [133] Elwhishi A, Ho PH, Naik K, Shihada B. Arbr: Adaptive reinforcement-based routing for dtn. In: Wireless and Mobile Computing, Networking and Communications (WiMob), 2010 IEEE 6th International Conference on. IEEE: 2010. p. 376–85. source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
In the paper
“the convergence time at a 2 packet/s activity level is around 700sec which implies that 1400 periods have elapsed before DQR-routing has converged.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > Xia et al.
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [482] Xia B, Wahab MH, Yang Y, Fan Z, Sooriyabandara M. Reinforcement learning based spectrum-aware routing in multi-hop cognitive radio networks. In: Cognitive Radio Oriented Wireless Networks and Communications, 2009. CROWNCOM’09. 4th International, Conference on. IEEE: 2009. p. 1–5. source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“They rely on a nstep temporal difference (TD) [433] learning method, and aim at reducing the frequency of message exchange, and thus the communication overhead without jeopardizing the convergence speed.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 5.1 Routing as a decentralized operation function
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [277] Lin Z, van der Schaar M. Autonomic and distributed joint routing and power control for delay-sensitive applications in multi-hop wireless networks. IEEE Trans Wirel Commun. 2011; 10(1):102–13. source
- Not checked yetcites [433] Sutton RS. Learning to predict by the methods of temporal differences. Mach learn. 1988; 3(1):9–44.
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“The resultant ML-based packet loss classifier exhibits greater flexibility and superiority over TCP-Vegas [73].”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 6.1 Packet loss classification
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [73] Brakmo LS, O’Malley SW, Peterson LL. Tcp vegas: New techniques for congestion detection and avoidance. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Communications Architectures, Protocols and Applications, ACM, New York, NY, USA, SIGCOMM ’94. New York: ACM: 1994. p. 24–35.
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“This work substitutes the Viterbi algorithm with a Bayesian binary test that provides comparable accuracy, while being computationally efficient.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 6.1 Packet loss classification
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [38] Barman D, Matta I. Model-based loss inference by tcp over heterogeneous networks. In: Proceedings of WiOpt 2004 Modeling and Optimization in Mobile, Ad Hoc and Wireless Networks. Cambridge: 2004. p. 364–73.
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The low computational and communication requirements of traditional RL algorithms, in particular Q-learning, and their ability to perform well at finding an optimal solution and adapting to changes in the environment, have motivated their-reportedly successful-application to traffic routing in a variety of network settings”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 5.4 Summary
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Therefore, the TCP throughput for wireless networks can be improved by accurately identifying the cause of packet loss [34,62,490] and reducing the TCP transmission rate only when congestion is detected.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 6.1 Packet loss classification
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [34] Balakrishnan H, Padmanabhan VN, Seshan S, Katz RH. A comparison of mechanisms for improving tcp performance over wireless links. IEEE/ACM Trans Netw. 1997; 5(6):756–69. source
- Not checked yetcites [62] Blanton E, Allman M. On making tcp more robust to packet reordering. SIGCOMM Comput Commun Rev. 2002; 32(1):20–30. source
- Not checked yetcites [490] Yu X, Qiao C, Liu Y. Tcp implementations and false time out detection in obs networks. In: IEEE INFOCOM 2004, vol 2.2004. p. 774–84. source
plainconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In practice the standard TCP congestion control mechanism has been optimized for wired networks.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 6.1 Packet loss classification
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
In the paper
“the ML-based solution of [282] was fundamental in creating a niche and instigating the feasibility of ML-based solutions for packet loss classification problems.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 6.1 Packet loss classification
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [282] Liu J, Matta I, Crovella M. End-to-end inference of loss nature in a hybrid wired/wireless environment.2003.
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“learners are very loosely coupled in most recently adopted decentralized RL approaches, where routers tend to select routing policies in an asynchronous, independent, very soft MARL fashion.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 5.4 Summary
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Despite these efforts, there are various shortcomings in areas such as packet loss classification, queue management, Congestion Window (CWND) update, and congestion inference.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 6 Congestion control
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Clearly, MARL aims at coordinating learning agents in order to achieve the optimal network-wide performance.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 5.4 Summary
boosteddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“Barman and Matta [38] use EM on a 2-state HMM and consider discrete delay values to improve the accuracy of the above packet loss classifier, though at the expense of a higher computational cost.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 6.1 Packet loss classification
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [38] Barman D, Matta I. Model-based loss inference by tcp over heterogeneous networks. In: Proceedings of WiOpt 2004 Modeling and Optimization in Mobile, Ad Hoc and Wireless Networks. Cambridge: 2004. p. 364–73.
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Another well-known congestion control mechanism is queue management [72] that operates inside the intermediate nodes of the network (e.g.switches and routers) to complement TCP.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 6 Congestion control
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [72] Braden B, Clark D, Crowcroft J, Davie B, Deering S, Estrin D, Floyd S, Jacobson V, Minshall G, Partridge C, Peterson L, Ramakrishnan K, Shenker S, Wroclawski J, Zhang L. Recommendations on queue management and congestion avoidance in the internet. RFC 2309, Internet Engineering Task Force. 1998. https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc2309 . source
boosted- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“TCP congestion control mechanisms operate in the end-systems of the network to limit the packet sending rate when congestion is detected.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 6 Congestion control
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [13] Allman M, Paxson V, Blanton E. TCP Congestion Control. RFC 5681, Internet Engineering Task Force. 2009. https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc5681 . source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Boosting DT with 25 trees provide the highest accuracy and the second fastest training time.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 6.1 Packet loss classification
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [129] El Khayat I, Geurts P, Leduc G. Improving TCP in Wireless Networks with an Adaptive Machine-Learnt Classifier of Packet Loss Causes. Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer Berlin Heidelberg; 2005, pp. 549–60. source
- Not checked yetcites [130] El Khayat I, Geurts P, Leduc G. Enhancement of tcp over wired/wireless networks with packet loss classifiers inferred by supervised learning. Wirel Netw. 2010; 16(2):273–90. source
- Not checked yetcites [163] Geurts P, Khayat IE, Leduc G. A machine learning approach to improve congestion control over wireless computer networks. In: Data Mining, 2004. ICDM ’04. Fourth IEEE International Conference on: 2004. p. 383–6. source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Active Queue Management (AQM) is a proactive approach that mitigates the limitations of Drop-tail by dropping packets (or marking them for drop) before a queue becomes full [72].”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 6.2 Queue management
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [72] Braden B, Clark D, Crowcroft J, Davie B, Deering S, Estrin D, Floyd S, Jacobson V, Minshall G, Partridge C, Peterson L, Ramakrishnan K, Shenker S, Wroclawski J, Zhang L. Recommendations on queue management and congestion avoidance in the internet. RFC 2309, Internet Engineering Task Force. 1998. https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc2309 . source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The conventional technique for queue management is Drop-tail, which adopts the First-In-First-Out (FIFO) scheme to handle packets that enter a queue.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 6.2 Queue management
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“Jayaraj et al. [214] tackle the classification of congestion losses and contention losses in Optical Burst Switching (OBS) networks.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 6.1 Packet loss classification
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [214] Jayaraj A, Venkatesh T, Murthy CSR. Loss classification in optical burst switching networks using machine learning techniques: improving the performance of tcp. IEEE J Sel Areas Commun. 2008; 26(6):45–54. source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“The TCP variant using EM for clustering perform slightly better than EM for HMM, as the former produce states (clusters) with a higher degree of similarity, while requiring a similar training time.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 6.1 Packet loss classification
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [214] Jayaraj A, Venkatesh T, Murthy CSR. Loss classification in optical burst switching networks using machine learning techniques: improving the performance of tcp. IEEE J Sel Areas Commun. 2008; 26(6):45–54. source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Their ML-based packet loss classifier is flexible and enables the selection between TCP throughput gain and fairness without retraining the classifier.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 6.1 Packet loss classification
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [129] El Khayat I, Geurts P, Leduc G. Improving TCP in Wireless Networks with an Adaptive Machine-Learnt Classifier of Packet Loss Causes. Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer Berlin Heidelberg; 2005, pp. 549–60. source
- Not checked yetcites [130] El Khayat I, Geurts P, Leduc G. Enhancement of tcp over wired/wireless networks with packet loss classifiers inferred by supervised learning. Wirel Netw. 2010; 16(2):273–90. source
- Not checked yetcites [163] Geurts P, Khayat IE, Leduc G. A machine learning approach to improve congestion control over wireless computer networks. In: Data Mining, 2004. ICDM ’04. Fourth IEEE International Conference on: 2004. p. 383–6. source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“queue management is in charge of dropping packets when appropriate, to control the queue length in the intermediate nodes [72].”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 6.2 Queue management
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [72] Braden B, Clark D, Crowcroft J, Davie B, Deering S, Estrin D, Floyd S, Jacobson V, Minshall G, Partridge C, Peterson L, Ramakrishnan K, Shenker S, Wroclawski J, Zhang L. Recommendations on queue management and congestion avoidance in the internet. RFC 2309, Internet Engineering Task Force. 1998. https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc2309 . source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“these AQM schemes apply different supervised techniques for TSF [160, 179, 212, 498] and reinforcementbased methods for deducing the increment in the packet drop probability [298, 427, 428, 485, 499].”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 6.2 Queue management
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [160] Gao Y, He G, Hou JC. On exploiting traffic predictability in active queue management. In: Proceedings. Twenty-First Annual Joint Conference of the IEEE Computer and Communications Societies, vol. 3. Piscataway: IEEE: 2002. p. 1630–9.
- Not checked yetcites [179] Hariri B, Sadati N. Nn-red: an aqm mechanism based on neural networks. Electron Lett. 2007; 43(19):1053–5. source
- Not checked yetcites [212] Jain A, Karandikar A, Verma R. An adaptive prediction based approach for congestion estimation in active queue management (apace). In: Global Telecommunications Conference, 2003. GLOBECOM ’03. IEEE, vol. 7. Piscataway: IEEE: 2003. p. 4153–7.
- Not checked yetcites [498] Zhani MF, Elbiaze H, Kamoun F. α_snfaqm: an active queue management mechanism using neurofuzzy prediction. In: 2007 12th IEEE Symposium on Computers and Communications.2007. p. 381–6. source
- Not checked yetcites [298] Masoumzadeh SS, Taghizadeh G, Meshgi K, Shiry S. Deep blue: A fuzzy q-learning enhanced active queue management scheme. In: 2009 International Conference on Adaptive and Intelligent Systems: 2009. p. 43–8. source
- Not checked yetcites [427] Sun J, Zukerman M. An adaptive neuron aqm for a stable internet. In: Proceedings of the 6th International IFIP-TC6 Conference on Ad Hoc and Sensor Networks, Wireless Networks, Next Generation Internet, Springer-Verlag, Berlin, Heidelberg, NETWORKING’07.2007. p. 844–54. source
- Not checked yetcites [428] Sun J, Chan S, Ko Kt, Chen G, Zukerman M. Neuron pid: A robust aqm scheme. In: Proceedings of the Australian Telecommunication Networks and Applications Conference (ATNAC) 2006.2006. p. 259–62.
- Not checked yetcites [485] Yan Q, Lei Q. A new active queue management algorithm based on self-adaptive fuzzy neural-network pid controller. In: 2011 International Conference on, Internet Technology and Applications: 2011. p. 1–4. source
- Not checked yetcites [499] Zhou C, Di D, Chen Q, Guo J. An adaptive aqm algorithm based on neuron reinforcement learning. In: 2009 IEEE International Conference on Control and Automation: 2009. p. 1342–6. source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“α_SNFAQM achieves smaller and more stable queue length than PAQM and APACE, while providing comparable goodput.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 6.2 Queue management
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [498] Zhani MF, Elbiaze H, Kamoun F. α_snfaqm: an active queue management mechanism using neurofuzzy prediction. In: 2007 12th IEEE Symposium on Computers and Communications.2007. p. 381–6. source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“APACE is comparable to PAQM in terms of prediction accuracy and queue stability, while providing better link utilization with lower packet loss and delay under multiple bottleneck links.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 6.2 Queue management
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [212] Jain A, Karandikar A, Verma R. An adaptive prediction based approach for congestion estimation in active queue management (apace). In: Global Telecommunications Conference, 2003. GLOBECOM ’03. IEEE, vol. 7. Piscataway: IEEE: 2003. p. 4153–7.
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“this work lacks comparison of NN-RED with similar approaches, such as PAQM, APACE, and α_SNFAQM, in terms of performance and computational overhead.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 6.2 Queue management
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Therefore, PAQM is capable of providing high link utilization while incurring low packet loss.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 6.2 Queue management
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Simulations demonstrate that the α_SNF predictor slightly exceeds the accuracy of the NMLS-based predictor and incurs lower computational overhead.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 6.2 Queue management
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [498] Zhani MF, Elbiaze H, Kamoun F. α_snfaqm: an active queue management mechanism using neurofuzzy prediction. In: 2007 12th IEEE Symposium on Computers and Communications.2007. p. 381–6. source
boosteddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“DEEP BLUE improves BLUE in terms of queue stabilization and dropping policy.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 6.2 Queue management
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [298] Masoumzadeh SS, Taghizadeh G, Meshgi K, Shiry S. Deep blue: A fuzzy q-learning enhanced active queue management scheme. In: 2009 International Conference on Adaptive and Intelligent Systems: 2009. p. 43–8. source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The proposals presented in this survey conduct online training in the intermediate nodes of the network and evaluate their solutions by simulating diverse network topologies, mostly in ns2, using characteristics of wired networks.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 6.2 Queue management
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Random Early Detection (RED) [148] is the earliest and most well known AQM scheme.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 6.2 Queue management
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [148] Floyd S, Jacobson V. Random early detection gateways for congestion avoidance. IEEE/ACM Trans Netw. 1993; 1(4):397–413. source
boosted- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“the authors demonstrated that their linear predictor achieves a good accuracy, enabling PAQM to enhance the stability of the queue length when compared to RED-based schemes.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 6.2 Queue management
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [160] Gao Y, He G, Hou JC. On exploiting traffic predictability in active queue management. In: Proceedings. Twenty-First Annual Joint Conference of the IEEE Computer and Communications Societies, vol. 3. Piscataway: IEEE: 2002. p. 1630–9.
boosteddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“its performance (w.r.t.link utilization and packet drop) greatly depends on its parameter tuning, which has not been successfully addressed [269].”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 6.2 Queue management
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [269] Li F, Sun J, Zukerman M, Liu Z, Xu Q, Chan S, Chen G, Ko KT. A comparative simulation study of tcp/aqm systems for evaluating the potential of neuron-based aqm schemes. J Netw Comput Appl. 2014; 41(Supplement C):274–99. source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Basic simulations exhibit that NN-RED outperforms RED and Drop-tail in terms of queuing delay, dropped packets, and queue stability.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 6.2 Queue management
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [179] Hariri B, Sadati N. Nn-red: an aqm mechanism based on neural networks. Electron Lett. 2007; 43(19):1053–5. source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“DEEP BLUE only generates a slight surplus of storage and computational overhead over BLUE, though no evaluation results are reported.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 6.2 Queue management
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [298] Masoumzadeh SS, Taghizadeh G, Meshgi K, Shiry S. Deep blue: A fuzzy q-learning enhanced active queue management scheme. In: 2009 International Conference on Adaptive and Intelligent Systems: 2009. p. 43–8. source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“the PID component includes a transfer function that increases the computational overhead of the PIDNN, when compared to a simple SLP-NN.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 6.2 Queue management
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“BLUE suffers from inaccurate parameter setting and is highly dependent on its parameters.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 6.2 Queue management
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [144] Feng W-C, Shin KG, Kandlur DD, Saha D. The blue active queue management algorithms. IEEE/ACM Trans Netw. 2002; 10(4):513–28. source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“TCP-Vegas fails to fully utilize the available bandwidth in WANETs, as its RTT-based rate estimate is incorrect under unstable network conditions [219].”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 6.3 Congestion window update
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [219] Jiang H, Luo Y, Zhang Q, Yin M, Wu C. Tcp-gvegas with prediction and adaptation in multi-hop ad hoc networks. Wirel Netw. 2017; 23(5):1535–48. source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“When comparing only NN-based schemes, FAPIDNN provides the best QL Acc , while Neuron PID has the least QL Jit and packet drop.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > Li et al.
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [269] Li F, Sun J, Zukerman M, Liu Z, Xu Q, Chan S, Chen G, Ko KT. A comparative simulation study of tcp/aqm systems for evaluating the potential of neuron-based aqm schemes. J Netw Comput Appl. 2014; 41(Supplement C):274–99. source
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“For multiple bottleneck links, one of the PI schemes (i.e.IAPI [429]) present better QL Acc and packet drop, yet producing higher QL Jit .”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > Li et al.
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [429] Sun J, Chan S, Zukerman M. Iapi: An intelligent adaptive pi active queue management scheme. Comput Commun. 2012; 35(18):2281–93. source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Unless otherwise stated, the RL component conducts online training in the end-systems of the network to decide the increment for updating CWND.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 6.3 Congestion window update
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“TCP in wireless lossy links unnecessarily lowers its rate by reducing CWND at each packet loss, negatively affecting the end-to-end performance.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 6.3 Congestion window update
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Simulations in GloMoSim demonstrate that TCP-FALA experiences lower packet loss and higher throughput than standard TCP-Reno in different network conditions.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 6.3 Congestion window update
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [380] Ramana BV, Manoj BS, Murthy CSR. Learning-tcp: a novel learning automata based reliable transport protocol for ad hoc wireless networks. In: 2nd International Conference on Broadband Networks 2005.2005. p. 484–493. Vol. 1. source
boosteddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“networks with a high Bandwidth-Delay Product (BDP), such as satellite networks, require a more aggressive CWND increase.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 6.3 Congestion window update
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“TCP was designed based on specific network conditions and assumes all losses as congestion”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 6.3 Congestion window update
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Some of these approaches are particularly designed for resourceconstrained networks, including WANETs [29,219,379,380] and IoT [271], while others address a wider range of network architectures [30,122,477], such as satellite, cellular, and data center networks.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 6.3 Congestion window update
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [29] Badarla V, Murthy CSR. Learning-tcp: A stochastic approach for efficient update in tcp congestion window in ad hoc wireless networks. J Parallel Distrib Comput. 2011; 71(6):863–78. source
- Not checked yetcites [219] Jiang H, Luo Y, Zhang Q, Yin M, Wu C. Tcp-gvegas with prediction and adaptation in multi-hop ad hoc networks. Wirel Netw. 2017; 23(5):1535–48. source
- Not checked yetcites [379] Ramana BV, Murthy CSR. Learning-tcp: A novel learning automata based congestion window updating mechanism for ad hoc wireless networks. In: Proceedings of the 12th International Conference on High Performance Computing, Springer-Verlag, Berlin, Heidelberg, HiPC’05.2005. p. 454–464. source
- Not checked yetcites [380] Ramana BV, Manoj BS, Murthy CSR. Learning-tcp: a novel learning automata based reliable transport protocol for ad hoc wireless networks. In: 2nd International Conference on Broadband Networks 2005.2005. p. 484–493. Vol. 1. source
- Not checked yetcites [271] Li W, Zhou F, Meleis W, Chowdhury K. Learning-based and data-driven tcp design for memory-constrained iot. In: 2016 International Conference on Distributed Computing in Sensor Systems (DCOSS).2016a. p. 199–205. source
- Not checked yetcites [30] Badarla V, Siva Ram Murthy C. A novel learning based solution for efficient data transport in heterogeneous wireless networks. Wirel Netw. 2010; 16(6):1777–98. source
- Not checked yetcites [122] Dong M, Li Q, Zarchy D, Godfrey PB, Schapira M. Pcc: Re-architecting congestion control for consistent high performance. In: Proceedings of the 12th, USENIX Conference on Networked Systems Design and Implementation, USENIX Association, Berkeley, CA, USA, NSDI’15. Berkley: USENIX Association: 2015. p. 395–408.
- Not checked yetcites [477] Winstein K, Balakrishnan H. Tcp ex machina: Computer-generated congestion control. In: Proceedings of the ACM SIGCOMM 201 Conference on SIGCOMM, SIGCOMM ’13. New York: ACM: 2013. p. 123–34.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“networks with a low BDP, such as Wireless Ad hoc Networks (WANET), call for a more conservative CWND increase.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 6.3 Congestion window update
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“Furthermore, basic simulations in ns-3 reveal that FK-TCPLearning improves the throughput and delay of TCP-NewReno, while being marginally inferior to TCPLearning.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 6.3 Congestion window update
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [271] Li W, Zhou F, Meleis W, Chowdhury K. Learning-based and data-driven tcp design for memory-constrained iot. In: 2016 International Conference on Distributed Computing in Sensor Systems (DCOSS).2016a. p. 199–205. source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“For the aforementioned reasons, several ML-based approaches have addressed the limitations of inferring the congestion in various network architectures by estimating different network parameters: throughput [238, 316, 371], RTT [22,128], and mobility [309] in TCP-based networks, table entries rate in NDNs [230], and congestion level in DTNs [412].”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 6.4 Congestion inference
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [238] Khayat IE, Geurts P, Leduc G. Machine-learnt versus analytical models of tcp throughput. Comput Netw. 2007; 51(10):2631–44. source
- Not checked yetcites [316] Mirza M, Sommers J, Barford P, Zhu X. A machine learning approach to tcp throughput prediction. IEEE/ACM Trans Netw. 2010; 18(4):1026–39. source
- Not checked yetcites [371] Quer G, Meenakshisundaram H, Tamma B, Manoj BS, Rao R, Zorzi M. Cognitive network inference through bayesian network analysis.2010, pp. 1–6. source
- Not checked yetcites [22] Arouche Nunes BA, Veenstra K, Ballenthin W, Lukin S, Obraczka K. A machine learning framework for tcp round-trip time estimation. EURASIP J Wirel Commun Netw. 2014; 2014(1):47. source
- Not checked yetcites [128] Edalat Y, Ahn JS, Obraczka K. Smart experts for network state estimation. IEEE Trans Netw Serv Manag. 2016; 13(3):622–35. source
- Not checked yetcites [309] Mezzavilla M, Quer G, Zorzi M. On the effects of cognitive mobility prediction in wireless multi-hop ad hoc networks. In: 2014 IEEE International Conference on Communications (ICC): 2014. p. 1638–44. source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Simulations of single-hop-wireless networks in ns-2 show that UL-TCP achieves significantly better packet loss and fairness than TCP-NewReno and TCP-ATL [10] (a non-ML TCP variant designed for single-hopwireless networks).”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 6.3 Congestion window update
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [30] Badarla V, Siva Ram Murthy C. A novel learning based solution for efficient data transport in heterogeneous wireless networks. Wirel Netw. 2010; 16(6):1777–98. source
- Not checked yetcites [10] Akan OB, Akyildiz IF. ATL: an adaptive transport layer suite for next-generation wireless internet. IEEE J Sel Areas Commun. 2004; 22(5):802–17. source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“Simulations in ns-2 reveal that TCP-GVegas outperforms TCP-NewReno and TCP-Vegas in terms of throughput and delay for different wireless topologies and varying network conditions.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 6.3 Congestion window update
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [219] Jiang H, Luo Y, Zhang Q, Yin M, Wu C. Tcp-gvegas with prediction and adaptation in multi-hop ad hoc networks. Wirel Netw. 2017; 23(5):1535–48. source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“MLP-NN achieve the lowest accuracy error, followed by MART with [332].”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 6.4 Congestion inference
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [238] Khayat IE, Geurts P, Leduc G. Machine-learnt versus analytical models of tcp throughput. Comput Netw. 2007; 51(10):2631–44. source
- Not checked yetcites [332] Networks and Mobile Systems Group. Resilient overlay networks RON. 2017. http://nms.csail.mit.edu/ron/ . Accessed 27 Dec 2017.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Simulations in the Opportunistic Network Environment (ONE) tool show that Smart-DTN-CC achieves higher delivery ratio and significantly lower delay than existing DTN congestion control mechanisms, such as CCC [265] and SR [406].”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 6.4 Congestion inference
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [412] Silva AP, Obraczka K, Burleigh S, Hirata CM. Smart congestion control for delay- and disruption tolerant networks. In: 2016 13th Annual IEEE International Conference on Sensing, Communication, and Networking (SECON).2016. p. 1–9. source
- Not checked yetcites [265] Leela-Amornsin L, Esaki H. Heuristic congestion control for message deletion in delay tolerant network. In: Proceedings of the Third Conference on Smart Spaces and Next Generation Wired, and 10th International Conference on Wireless Networking, Springer-Verlag, Berlin, Heidelberg, ruSMART/NEW2AN’10: 2010. p. 287–98. source
- Not checked yetcites [406] Seligman M, Fall K, Mundur P. Alternative custodians for congestion control in delay tolerant networks. In: Proceedings of the 2006 SIGCOMM Workshop on Challenged Networks, CHANTS ’06.New York: ACM: 2006. p. 229–36.
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“TCP degrades the throughput of the network when packet losses are due to reasons other than congestion.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 6.5 Summary
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“However, such estimation remains imprecise mainly because of the difficulty in modeling the relationships between the various parameters.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 6.5 Summary
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“However, these schemes suffer from poor responsiveness to time-varying and nonlinear network conditions.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 6.5 Summary
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
In the paper
“This mobility classifier was used to implement a TCP variant that outperforms TCP-NewReno in terms of throughput and outage probability.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 6.4 Congestion inference
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [309] Mezzavilla M, Quer G, Zorzi M. On the effects of cognitive mobility prediction in wireless multi-hop ad hoc networks. In: 2014 IEEE International Conference on Communications (ICC): 2014. p. 1638–44. source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“General model driven approaches for resource allocation have fallen short in keeping up with the velocity and volume of the resource requests in the network.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 7 Resource management
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“However, it is non-trivial to predict demand, while over and under estimation can lead to both poor utilization and loss in revenue.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 7 Resource management
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
- Rests on an assumption: Over and under estimation of demand can lead to both poor utilization and loss in revenue.
- Rests on an assumption: It is non-trivial to predict demand.
In the paper
“However, there were unrealistic underlying assumptions.First, all calls had similar traffic characteristics, that is, single bit or multi bitrate.Second, cell loss rate was the sole QoS parameter.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 7.1 Admission control
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [189] Hiramatsu A. Atm communications network control by neural networks. IEEE Trans Neural Netw. 1990; 1(1):122–30. source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“However, it may degrade the QoS of existing services due to scarcity of resources and consequentially violate SLA, incurring penalties and loss in revenue.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 7 Resource management
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may state two separate claims as one.
- Rests on an assumption: Accepting a new request generates revenue for the network service provider.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The underlying challenge in resource allocation is to adapt resources for long-term benefits in the face of unpredictability.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 7 Resource management
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“However, DP suffers from two limitations in the context of admission control.First, it expects the number of states in the MDP to be in polynomial order, which is seldom the case in real networks.Second, DP requires explicit state transition probabilities, which are non-trivial to determine a priori.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > Vassis et al.
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Therefore, RL, that can handle MDP problems with very large state spaces and unknown state transition probabilities, has been successfully applied to solve MDP-based admission control problems in networking.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > Vassis et al.
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [311] Mignanti S, Di Giorgio A, Suraci V. A model based rl admission control algorithm for next generation networks. In: Networks, 2009. ICN’09. Eighth International Conference on. IEEE: 2009. p. 191–6. source
- Not checked yetcites [458] Wang J, Qiu Y. A new call admission control strategy for lte femtocell networks. In: 2nd international conference on advances in computer science and engineering.2013. source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“The authors evaluate the BN model via ns-3 based simulation of a WLAN, having both VoIP and TCP traffic, and show an accuracy of 95%.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > Vassis et al.
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [372] Quer G, Baldo N, Zorzi M. Cognitive call admission control for voip over ieee 802.11 using bayesian networks. In: Global Telecommunications Conference (GLOBECOM 2011), 2011 IEEE. IEEE: 2011. p. 1–6. source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“Using a LTE simulator, it is shown that MLP-NN can achieve up to 86% accurate decisions provided it has been trained over a relatively long period of time.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 7.1 Admission control
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [66] Bojovic B, Baldo N, Dini P. A cognitive scheme for radio admission control in lte systems. In: Cognitive Information Processing (CIP), 2012 3rd International Workshop on. Piscataway: IEEE: 2012. p. 1–3.
plainconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“Using network throughput and packet generation rates of all nodes prior to starting each session and the average packet delays of those sessions as the training and validation data, respectively, they found probabilistic RBFNN to always converge with a success rate between 77 and 88%.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > Vassis et al.
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [452] Vassis D, Kampouraki A, Belsis P, Skourlas C. Admission control of video sessions over ad hoc networks using neural classifiers.IEEE; 2014, pp. 1015–20. source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“These RNNs achieve accuracies between 89% and 98%, demonstrating that this admission control mechanism can learn from the historical performances of VNE algorithms.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > Vassis et al.
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [63] Blenk A, Kalmbach P, van der Smagt P, Kellerer W. Boost online virtual network embedding: Using neural networks for admission control. In: Network and Service Management (CNSM), 2016 12th International Conference on. Piscataway: IEEE: 2016. p. 10–8.
boosteddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“The authors report 98.5% and 92% accuracy for offline and online learning, respectively.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 7.1 Admission control
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [36] Baldo N, Dini P, Nin-Guerrero J. User-driven call admission control for voip over wlan with a neural network based cognitive engine. In: Cognitive Information Processing (CIP), 2010 2nd International Workshop on. IEEE: 2010. p. 52–6. source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Most importantly, the HNN does not require any training, and can easily adapt to dynamic network conditions.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > Vassis et al.
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [8] Ahn CW, Ramakrishna RS. Qos provisioning dynamic connection-admission control for multimedia wireless networks using a hopfield neural network. IEEE Trans Veh Technol. 2004; 53(1):106–117. source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Despite its high accuracy, a critical disadvantage of MLP-NN is over-fitting, thus it fails to generalize in the face of partial new inputs.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 7.1 Admission control
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [66] Bojovic B, Baldo N, Dini P. A cognitive scheme for radio admission control in lte systems. In: Cognitive Information Processing (CIP), 2012 3rd International Workshop on. Piscataway: IEEE: 2012. p. 1–3.
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“A major difference between NN and BN is that NN can directly predict the value of the R-factor, while BN provides a distribution over its possible values.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > Vassis et al.
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [67] Bojovic B, Quer G, Baldo N, Rao RR. Bayesian and neural network schemes for call admission control in lte systems. In: Global Communications Conference (GLOBECOM), 2013 IEEE. Piscataway: IEEE: 2013. p. 1246–52.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“This admission control mechanism achieves significant gains in ATM networks, in terms of minimizing the blocking and dropping probabilities and maximizing fairness in resource allocation.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > Vassis et al.
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [8] Ahn CW, Ramakrishna RS. Qos provisioning dynamic connection-admission control for multimedia wireless networks using a hopfield neural network. IEEE Trans Veh Technol. 2004; 53(1):106–117. source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“In a comparison of the different ML-based techniques for fault prediction, they show that DNN with autoencoders outperform other ML techniques, including autoregressive NN, linear and nonlinear SVM, and exponential and linear regression.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > Wang et al.
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [255] Kumar Y, Farooq H, Imran A. Fault prediction and reliability analysis in a real cellular network. In: Wireless Communications and Mobile Computing Conference (IWCMC), 2017 13th International. IEEE: 2017. p. 1090–1095. source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“Tong et al. [446] formulate this problem as a semi-MDP, and leverage Q-learning to define policies for route selection, such that the revenue is maximized and QoS requirements of the requests are met.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > Mignanti et al.
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [446] Tong H, Brown TX. Adaptive call admission control under quality of service constraints: a reinforcement learning solution. IEEE J sel Areas Commun. 2000; 18(2):209–21. source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Their evaluation results reveal that though k-Means and EM are relatively faster than FCM, FCM is more accurate.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 8.2 Detecting fault
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [5] Adda M, Qader K, Al-Kasassbeh M. Comparative analysis of clustering techniques in network traffic faults classification. Int J Innov Res Comput Commun Eng. 2017; 5(4):6551–63.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“User QoE assessment is complex as individual experience depends on individual expectation and perception.Both are subjective in nature, and hard to quantify and measure.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 9 QoS and QoE management
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“They are as such accurate, but at the expense of a high computational effort.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 9 QoS and QoE management
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“The authors report a RMSE of below 3% using videos from a pool of 38 video clips with different data rates and durations.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 7.2 Resource allocation
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [443] Testolin A, Zanforlin M, De Grazia MDF, Munaretto D, Zanella A, Zorzi M, Zorzi M. A machine learning approach to qoe-based video admission control and resource allocation in wireless systems. In: Ad Hoc Networking Workshop (MED-HOC-NET), 2014 13th Annual, Mediterranean. IEEE: 2014. p. 31–38. source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“Evaluation results show that AIWPSO outperforms the other learning algorithms, with respect to accuracy (based on MSE).”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 7.2 Resource allocation
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [6] Adeel A, Larijani H, Javed A, Ahmadinia A. Critical analysis of learning algorithms in random neural network based cognitive engine for lte systems. In: Vehicular Technology Conference (VTC Spring), 2015 IEEE 81st. IEEE: 2015. p. 1–5. source
plaindirectn = 6,000- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“However, AIWPSO's better accuracy is achieved at the expense of longer convergence time due to extra computational complexity.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 7.2 Resource allocation
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [6] Adeel A, Larijani H, Javed A, Ahmadinia A. Critical analysis of learning algorithms in random neural network based cognitive engine for lte systems. In: Vehicular Technology Conference (VTC Spring), 2015 IEEE 81st. IEEE: 2015. p. 1–5. source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“The results show significant improvement over heuristic based algorithms.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > Mignanti et al.
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [446] Tong H, Brown TX. Adaptive call admission control under quality of service constraints: a reinforcement learning solution. IEEE J sel Areas Commun. 2000; 18(2):209–21. source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“The results reveal that DTs and rule learners achieve the highest accuracy and result in significant improvement in data delivery rates.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > Snow et al.
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [466] Wang Y, Martonosi M, Peh LS. Predicting link quality using supervised learning in wireless sensor networks. ACM SIGMOBILE Mob Comput Commun Rev. 2007; 11(3):71–83. source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“However because one cannot force users to rate a service and rate it objectively, MOS scores can be unfair and biased, and are subjected to outliers.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 9 QoS and QoE management
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Rests on an assumption: One cannot force users to rate a service objectively.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Nonetheless, it is clear that ML techniques can aid the cumbersome and human centric fault management process, by either predicting faults in advance, or narrowing down the cause or location of the fault that could not be avoided in the first place.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 8.5 Summary
boostedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“While monitoring and controlling QoS parameters is essential for delivering high service quality, it is more crucial, especially for service providers, to evaluate service quality from the user's perspective.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 9 QoS and QoE management
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Using real trouble tickets, obtained from an enterprise service, the authors report a precision of over 83%.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 8.4 Automated mitigation
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [470] Watanabe A, Ishibashi K, Toyono T, Kimura T, Watanabe K, Matsuo Y, Shiomoto K. Workflow extraction for service operation using multiple unstructured trouble tickets.IEEE; 2016, pp. 652–8. source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“They are more efficient to compute, however they may be less accurate.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 9 QoS and QoE management
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Statistical and ML techniques have been found useful in linking QoE to network-and application-level QoS, and understanding the impact of the latter on the former.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 9 QoS and QoE management
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“While some find it sufficient to correlate the QoE to a single network QoS parameter [145, 240, 383, 408], e.g.delay or throughput, others argue that multiple QoS parameters impact the QoE and need to be considered in tandem as features in a QoE/QoS correlation model [89,102,114,235,287,328,432].”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 9.4 Summary
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [145] Fiedler M, Hossfeld T, Tran-Gia P. A generic quantitative relationship between quality of experience and quality of service. IEEE Netw. 2010;24(2). source
- Not checked yetcites [240] Khorsandroo S, Md Noor R, Khorsandroo S. A generic quantitative relationship to assess interdependency of qoe and qos. KSII Trans Internet Inf Syst. 2013;7(2). source
- Not checked yetcites [383] Reichl P, Egger S, Schatz R, D’Alconzo A. The logarithmic nature of qoe and the role of the weber-fechner law in qoe assessment.IEEE; 2010, pp. 1–5. source
- Not checked yetcites [408] Shaikh J, Fiedler M, Collange D. Quality of experience from user and network perspectives. annals of telecommun-annales des telecommun. 2010; 65(1-2):47–57. source
- Not checked yetcites [89] Charonyktakis P, Plakia M, Tsamardinos I, Papadopouli M. On user-centric modular qoe prediction for voip based on machine-learning algorithms. IEEE Trans Mob Comput. 2016; 15(6):1443–56. source
- Not checked yetcites [102] Claeys M, Latre S, Famaey J, De Turck F. Design and evaluation of a self-learning http adaptive video streaming client. IEEE commun lett. 2014a; 18(4):716–9. source
- Not checked yetcites [114] Demirbilek E, Grégoire JC. Machine learning–based parametric audiovisual quality prediction models for real-time communications. ACM Transactions on Multimedia Computing. Commun Appl (TOMM). 2017; 13(2):16.
- Not checked yetcites [235] Khan A, Sun L, Ifeachor E. Content-based video quality prediction for mpeg4 video streaming over wireless networks. J Multimedia. 2009a;4(4). source
- Not checked yetcites [287] Machado VA, Silva CN, Oliveira RS, Melo AM, Silva M, Francês CR, Costa JC, Vijaykumar NL, Hirata CM. A new proposal to provide estimation of qos and qoe over wimax networks: An approach based on computational intelligence and discrete-event simulation.IEEE; 2011, pp. 1–6. source
- Not checked yetcites [328] Mushtaq MS, Augustin B, Mellouk A. Empirical study based on machine learning approach to assess the qos/qoe correlation. In: Networks and Optical Communications (NOC), 2012 17th European Conference on. IEEE: 2012. p. 1–7. source
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The conducted experiments also show that all models perform quite well and that the RF model with complete set of features performs the best (lowest RMSE 0.340 and highest PCC 0.930).”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 9.1 QoE/QoS correlation with supervised ML
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“In the literature, simple-regression models with a single feature are most dominant [145, 240, 383, 408], although the collective impact of different QoS parameters was also considered [23,132].”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 9 QoS and QoE management
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [145] Fiedler M, Hossfeld T, Tran-Gia P. A generic quantitative relationship between quality of experience and quality of service. IEEE Netw. 2010;24(2). source
- Not checked yetcites [240] Khorsandroo S, Md Noor R, Khorsandroo S. A generic quantitative relationship to assess interdependency of qoe and qos. KSII Trans Internet Inf Syst. 2013;7(2). source
- Not checked yetcites [383] Reichl P, Egger S, Schatz R, D’Alconzo A. The logarithmic nature of qoe and the role of the weber-fechner law in qoe assessment.IEEE; 2010, pp. 1–5. source
- Not checked yetcites [408] Shaikh J, Fiedler M, Collange D. Quality of experience from user and network perspectives. annals of telecommun-annales des telecommun. 2010; 65(1-2):47–57. source
- Not checked yetcites [23] Aroussi S, Bouabana-Tebibel T, Mellouk A. Empirical QoE/QoS correlation model based on multiple parameters for VoD flows. In: Global Communications Conference (GLOBECOM), 2012 IEEE. IEEE: 2012. p. 1963–8. source
- Not checked yetcites [132] Elkotob M, Grandlund D, Andersson K, Ahlund C. Multimedia qoe optimized management using prediction and statistical learning. In: Local Computer Networks (LCN),2010 IEEE 35th Conference on. IEEE: 2010. p. 324–7. source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In addition, there is a lack of a clear quantitative description of the impact of network QoS on QoE.This impact is poorly understood and varies from one scenario to another.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 9.4 Summary
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“However, shifting to a random new video sequence after convergence time was not investigated.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 9.3 QoS/QoE prediction for HAS and DASH
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“However it is not compared to the other models, which would be useful to confirm or infirm the supremacy of RF.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 9.1 QoE/QoS correlation with supervised ML
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“It is also shown that CS2P achieves 3.2% improvement on overall QoE and 10.9% higher average bitrate over state-of-art Model Predictive Control (MPC) approach, which uses harmonic mean for throughput prediction.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 9.3 QoS/QoE prediction for HAS and DASH
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [432] Sun Y, Yin X, Jiang J, Sekar V, Lin F, Wang N, Liu T, Sinopoli B. Cs2p: Improving video bitrate selection and adaptation with data-driven throughput prediction. In: Proceedings of the 2016 conference on ACM SIGCOMM 2016 Conference. ACM: 2016. p. 272–85. source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Such metrics are found to draw more directly the impact of user quality perception to content providers; business objectives.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 9 QoS and QoE management
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Experiments with different feature sets show that, apart from the DNN model, all models perform better with the complete set of features, and hence do not require feature processing.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 9.1 QoE/QoS correlation with supervised ML
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Experiments show that, in terms of mean absolute error MAE, the supervised learning models generally outperform E-model and even the full-reference PESQ, only one exception is observed with dataset 2.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 9.1 QoE/QoS correlation with supervised ML
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [89] Charonyktakis P, Plakia M, Tsamardinos I, Papadopouli M. On user-centric modular qoe prediction for voip based on machine-learning algorithms. IEEE Trans Mob Comput. 2016; 15(6):1443–56. source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“The parameters of the models are not disclosed, and neither is the significance of the selected features in particular the viewer-related ones, whose usefulness and practicality in real-life deployment are questionable.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 9.1 QoE/QoS correlation with supervised ML
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [328] Mushtaq MS, Augustin B, Mellouk A. Empirical study based on machine learning approach to assess the qos/qoe correlation. In: Networks and Optical Communications (NOC), 2012 17th European Conference on. IEEE: 2012. p. 1–7. source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Data-driven approaches, in particular ML, have been employed mainly in two different ways: (1) to predict changes in network QoS, namely throughput, and trigger adaptation mechanism to reduce rebuffering time [432], and (2) to select appropriate adaptation action [102].”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 9.3 QoS/QoE prediction for HAS and DASH
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [432] Sun Y, Yin X, Jiang J, Sekar V, Lin F, Wang N, Liu T, Sinopoli B. Cs2p: Improving video bitrate selection and adaptation with data-driven throughput prediction. In: Proceedings of the 2016 conference on ACM SIGCOMM 2016 Conference. ACM: 2016. p. 272–85. source
- Not checked yetcites [102] Claeys M, Latre S, Famaey J, De Turck F. Design and evaluation of a self-learning http adaptive video streaming client. IEEE commun lett. 2014a; 18(4):716–9. source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“The authors claim that the Q-learning client achieves in average 9.12% higher estimated MOS (program-generated), with 16.65% lower standard deviation, than the traditional Microsoft ISS Smooth Streaming (MSS) client.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 9.3 QoS/QoE prediction for HAS and DASH
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [102] Claeys M, Latre S, Famaey J, De Turck F. Design and evaluation of a self-learning http adaptive video streaming client. IEEE commun lett. 2014a; 18(4):716–9. source
hedgeddirectn = 7- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“According to [89], RF is a better classifier than NN when it comes to predicting MOS.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 9.4 Summary
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [89] Charonyktakis P, Plakia M, Tsamardinos I, Papadopouli M. On user-centric modular qoe prediction for voip based on machine-learning algorithms. IEEE Trans Mob Comput. 2016; 15(6):1443–56. source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The key component of such a system is the comprehensiveness of the attack signatures.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 10.1 Misuse-based intrusion detection
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Though, contextual information undoubtedly influences QoE and is necessary to develop relevant QoE optimization strategies, it can raise privacy concerns.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 9.4 Summary
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
- Rests on an assumption: Contextual information undoubtedly influences QoE and is necessary to develop relevant QoE optimization strategies.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“It is undeniable that we are now facing a cyber arms race, where attackers are constantly finding clever ways to attack networks, while security experts are developing new measures to shield the network from known attacks, and most importantly zero-day attacks.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 10 Network security
boosted- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Naturally, all existing works employ supervised learning, and the majority perform the detection offline.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 10.1 Misuse-based intrusion detection
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: unclear — It is unclear why the paper says it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Still othe rs consider QoS as a confounding parameter and build different QoE assessment models for different network QoS conditions [453].”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 9.4 Summary
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [453] Vega MT, Mocanu DC, Liotta A. Unsupervised deep learning for real-time assessment of video streaming services. Multimedia Tools Appl. 2017;1–25.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Furthermore, the prevention capabilities of firewalls and anti-viruses are limited by the prescribed set of rules and patches.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 10 Network security
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“QoE measures, such as MOS, and user engagement metrics are very sensitive to contextual factors.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 9.4 Summary
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“This motivates the need for an efficient methodology for QoE/QoS correlation, based on a combination of quantifiable subjective and objective QoS measures and outcomes of service usage.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 9.4 Summary
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence.
In the paper
“It was among the first to highlight the limitations of rule-based expert systems, namely that they (i) fail to detect variants of known attacks, (ii) require constant updating, and (iii) fail to correlate between multiple individual instances of suspicious activities if they occur in isolation.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 10.1 Misuse-based intrusion detection
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [84] Cannady J. Artificial neural networks for misuse detection. In: Proceedings of the 21st National information systems security conference, vol. 26. Virginia: 1998. p. 368–81.
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Undoubtedly, businesses are constantly under security threats [231], which not only costs billions of dollars in damage and recovery [227], but could also have a detrimental impact to their reputation.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 10 Network security
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [231] Lab Kaspersky. Damage control: The cost of security breaches. IT security risks special report series Report, Kaspersky. 2015. https://media.kaspersky.com/pdf/it-risks-survey-report-cost-of-security-breaches.pdf . Accessed 10 Nov 2017.
- Not checked yetcites [227] Juniper Research. Cybercrime will cost businesses over $2 trillion by 2019. 2015. https://www.juniperresearch.com/press/press-releases/cybercrime-cost-businesses-over-2trillion . Accessed 10 Nov 2017.
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“However, this still needs to be validated in a real-world testbed.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 9.4 Summary
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“However, encryption keys and login credentials can be breached, exposing the network to all kinds of threats.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 10 Network security
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Clearly, there is still a need for a model that can achieve fast training time, without sacrificing the detection accuracy.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > Miller et al.
boosted- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The advantages of NN are its ability to analyze network traces in a less structured-manner (as opposed to rulebased systems), and to provide prediction in the form of a probability.The latter can enable the detection of variants of known attacks.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 10.1 Misuse-based intrusion detection
plainconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“ML for anomaly detection has received significant attention, due to the autonomy and robustness it offers in learning and adapting profiles of normality as they change over time.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 10.2 Anomaly-based intrusion detection
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The goal of ensemble methods is to integrate different ML techniques to leverage their benefits and overcome their individual limitations.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 10.1 Misuse-based intrusion detection
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“With ML, the system can learn patterns of normal behavior across environments, applications, group of users, and time.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 10.2 Anomaly-based intrusion detection
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In addition, it offers the ability to find complex correlations in the data that cannot be deduced from mere observation.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 10.2 Anomaly-based intrusion detection
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Network cyber-threats are constantly changing and evolving, making it crucial to identify”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 10.2 Anomaly-based intrusion detection
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
- Rests on an assumption: Network cyber-threats are constantly changing and evolving.
In the paper
“The authors found via multiple analysis techniques that the training and testing datasets represent dissimilar hypothesis for the U2R and R2L attack categories; so if one would employ any algorithm that attempts to learn the signature of these attacks using the training dataset is bound to perform poorly on the testing dataset.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 10.1 Misuse-based intrusion detection
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [398] Sabhnani M, Serpen G. Why machine learning algorithms fail in misuse detection on kdd intrusion detection data set. Intell data anal. 2004; 8(4):403–15. source
boosteddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Though misuse-based IDSs are very successful at detecting known attacks, they fail to identify new ones.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 10.2 Anomaly-based intrusion detection
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Since getting labeled data for attacks is a cumbersome task, active learning can relieve part of this tedious process by indicating the subset of data points that should be labeled to improve the confidence of the classifier.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > Miller et al.
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Rests on an assumption: Getting labeled data for attacks is a cumbersome task.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“A limitation of the aforementioned approaches is that they are all employed offline, which inhibits their application in real life.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > Miller et al.
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“A big issue with anomaly-based IDSs is false alarms, since it is difficult to obtain a complete representation of normality.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 10.2 Anomaly-based intrusion detection
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Rests on an assumption: It is difficult to obtain a complete representation of normality.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Though anomaly detection can be broadly divided into flow feature or payload-based detection, recently, deep learning and reinforcement learning are being aptly exploited.Primarily, this is due to their intrinsic ability to extrapolate data from limited knowledge.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 10.2 Anomaly-based intrusion detection
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“In fact, Sabhnani and Serpen [398] expose that no classifiers can be trained successfully on the KDD dataset to perform misuse detection for U2R or R2L attack categories.This is due to the deficiencies and limitations of the KDD dataset rather than the inadequacies of the proposed algorithms.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 10.1 Misuse-based intrusion detection
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [398] Sabhnani M, Serpen G. Why machine learning algorithms fail in misuse detection on kdd intrusion detection data set. Intell data anal. 2004; 8(4):403–15. source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“However, for IDSs this retraining may be performed daily (or even hourly) due to the fast and ever changing nature of cyber-threats [180].Hence, fast training times are critical for an adaptable and robust IDS.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > Miller et al.
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [180] Harrison V, Pagliery J. Nearly 1 million new malware threats released every day. 2015. http://money.cnn.com/2015/04/14/technology/security/cyber-attack-hacks-security/index.html . Accessed 28 Dec 2017.
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“This shows that restricting the features set to those that can be collected via SDN switches slightly impacts the TP rate; however it comes at a cost of a higher FP.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 10.2.1 Flow feature-based anomaly detection
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [64] Boero L, Marchese M, Zappatore S. Support vector machine meets software defined networking in ids domain. In: Proceedings of the 29th International Teletraffic Congress (ITC), vol. 3. New York: IEEE: 2017. p. 25–30.
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper relies on this without support.
Machine learning has been extensively applied to problems in pattern recognition, speech synthesis, and outlier detection, but its successful deployment for network operations and management has been limited.
“Though, ML has been extensively applied to problems in pattern recognition, speech synthesis, and outlier detection, its successful deployment for network operations and management has been limited.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Each network is unique and there is a lack of enforcement of standards to attain uniformity across networks.
“First, each network is unique and there is a lack of enforcement of standards to attain uniformity across networks.”
The paper relies on this without support.
The main obstacles to successful deployment of machine learning for network operations and management include what data can be collected from and what control actions can be exercised on legacy network devices.
“The main obstacles include what data can be collected from and what control actions can be exercised on legacy network devices.”
The paper relies on this without support.
The ability to program the network by leveraging Software-Defined Networking alleviates the obstacles to deploying machine learning for network operations and management.
“The ability to program the network by leveraging SDN alleviates these obstacles.”
The paper relies on this without support.
The cognition from machine learning can be used to aid in the automation of network operation and management tasks.
“The cognition from ML can be used to aid in the automation of network operation and management tasks.”
The authors state this as an assumption.
Mice flows are routed through Equal-cost multi-path routing, while elephant flows are routed through the least congested path.
“Presumably, mice flows are routed through Equal-cost multi-path routing, while elephant flows are routed through the least congested path.”
The authors state this as an assumption.
For tractability, sessions are assumed to be finite and a protocol model is derived as a distribution on n byte flows rather than a pair of flows.
“For tractability, the sessions are assumed to be finite and a protocol model is derived as a distribution on n byte flows, rather than pair of flows.”
The authors state this as an assumption.
Applications with similar QoS requirements exhibit similar statistical properties.
“They assume that applications with similar QoS requirements exhibit similar statistical properties.”
The paper relies on this without support.
The performance of classifiers varies significantly based on the type of flow features used.
“It is well-known that the performance of classifiers vary significantly based on the type of flow features used.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Flows inherently exhibit specific characteristics of network applications and protocols.
“Furthermore, flows inherently exhibit specific characteristics of network applications and protocols.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Network operators rarely have complete information about all the applications in their network.
“Rarely do network operators have complete information about all the applications in their network.”
The paper relies on this without support.
An optimal CWND update reduces the number of packets lost and delay, and increases throughput and fairness.
“It is important to note that an optimal CWND update reduces the number of packets lost and delay, and increases the throughput and fairness.”
The paper relies on this without support.
WANETs require a much finer update of the CWND due to their constrained bandwidth.
“In addition, WANETs require a much finer update of the CWND due to their constrained bandwidth.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Synthetic data rely on simulations that may differ from real conditions.
“However, synthetic data rely on simulations that may differ from real conditions.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Accepting a new request generates revenue for the network service provider.
“Evidently, accepting a new request generates revenue for the network service provider.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Over and under estimation of demand can lead to both poor utilization and loss in revenue.
“while over and under estimation can lead to both poor utilization and loss in revenue.”
The paper relies on this without support.
It is non-trivial to predict demand.
“However, it is non-trivial to predict demand”
The paper relies on this without support.
Allocating a guard channel for a new or hand-off call can raise the blocking probability.
“It is important to realize that allocating a guard channel for a new or hand-off call can raise the blocking probability.”
The paper relies on this without support.
The primary advantage of RL is that it can be deployed without any initial policies, and it can learn to adapt to the dynamic demands for a reactive resource allocation.
“The primary advantage of RL is that it can be deployed without any initial policies, and it can learn to adapt to the dynamic demands for a reactive resource allocation.”
The paper relies on this without support.
It is unrealistic to inject faults in the production network just for the sake of generating training data.
“Although injecting faults can help produce the required data [285], it is unrealistic to inject faults in the production network just for the sake of generating training data.”
The paper relies on this without support.
The knowledge about the impact of network performance on user experience is crucial, as it determines the success, degradation or failure of a service.
“The knowledge about the impact of network performance on user experience is crucial, as it determines the success, degradation or failure of a service.”
The paper relies on this without support.
In practice, delay, jitter, and throughput impairments are correlated and happen together.
“In practice, however impairments are correlated and happen together.”
The paper relies on this without support.
The huge volume of generated network traces renders manual inspection practically impossible.
“However, the huge volume of generated network traces renders manual inspection practically impossible.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Getting labeled data for attacks is a cumbersome task.
“Since getting labeled data for attacks is a cumbersome task”
The paper relies on this without support.
Network cyber-threats are constantly changing and evolving.
“Network cyber-threats are constantly changing and evolving”
The paper relies on this without support.
It is difficult to obtain a complete representation of normality.
“since it is difficult to obtain a complete representation of normality”
The paper relies on this without support.
Contextual information undoubtedly influences QoE and is necessary to develop relevant QoE optimization strategies.
“Though, contextual information undoubtedly influences QoE and is necessary to develop relevant QoE optimization strategies”
The paper relies on this without support.
One cannot force users to rate a service objectively.
“because one cannot force users to rate a service and rate it objectively”
The paper relies on this without support.
Benign network behavior is more common and will naturally group together, whereas anomalous behavior is more sparse and will appear as outliers in the dataset.
“In anomaly detection, the notion is that benign network behavior is more common and will naturally group together, whereas, anomalous behavior is more sparse and will appear as outliers in the dataset.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Guaranteeing the ground truth is difficult and requires manual labeling.
“This is expected since guaranteeing the ground truth is difficult and requires manual labeling.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Obtaining a complete representation of normal behavior is extremely challenging.
“Furthermore, obtaining a complete representation of normal behavior is extremely challenging.”
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
In the citing paper
“Furthermore, the needs to preserve the privacy and safety of sensitive datasets and to ensure legal compliance with a new regulation such as the European General Data Protection Regulation may impact research directions in requirements engineering [18,24,60,105].”
From Software engineering challenges for machine learning applications: A literature review (2020) · cites this paper as [18]
In the citing paper
“-Effort Estimation: Estimating the effort of an ML project is challenging because it is difficult to know to what extent the ML model will achieve its goal, and to estimate how many iterations will be needed to reach the state in which the performance gets acceptable levels [18,83].”
From Software engineering challenges for machine learning applications: A literature review (2020) · cites this paper as [18]
In the citing paper
“As mentioned in 4.5, there are challenges on ML model management and governance [18,27,34,65,88].”
From Software engineering challenges for machine learning applications: A literature review (2020) · cites this paper as [18]
In the citing paper
“Other challenges in this category are project risk estimation [24,107], and difficulties in estimating the effort arising from uncertainties in ML applications [18,83,92].”
From Software engineering challenges for machine learning applications: A literature review (2020) · cites this paper as [18]
In the citing paper
“The main challenges in this category are collaboration to ensure a successful project and adequate communication with customers [17,18,21,27,40,59,83].”
From Software engineering challenges for machine learning applications: A literature review (2020) · cites this paper as [18]
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
Each contradiction between two passages listed here was confirmed by an independent check.
Rated minor: it would not touch a result — a value no result rests on, a p-value that stays on the same side of the significance level, or a conflict that is clerical, resolved elsewhere in the paper, or outside its own findings.
In the paper
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 3.3 Summary
“Supervised NNs (including MLP and RNN) have been successfully applied to traffic prediction, as shown in Table 9.”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 3 Traffic prediction
“In the following subsections, we discuss the various traffic prediction techniques that leverage ML and summarize them in Table 3.”
Rated minor: it would not touch a result — a value no result rests on, a p-value that stays on the same side of the significance level, or a conflict that is clerical, resolved elsewhere in the paper, or outside its own findings.
In the paper
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 2.6 Evolution of machine learning techniques
“was first proposed by Cassandra et al. [25] in 1965”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > References
“25. Astrom K. Optimal control of markov processes with incomplete state information. J Mathl Anal Appl. 1965;10(1):174-205.”
Rated minor: it would not touch a result — a value no result rests on, a p-value that stays on the same side of the significance level, or a conflict that is clerical, resolved elsewhere in the paper, or outside its own findings.
In the paper
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 2.6 Evolution of machine learning techniques
“a (106, 60, 40, 1) MLP-NN has a 160-node input layer”
§ A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities > 2.6 Evolution of machine learning techniques
“NNs in general, will be denoted by the tuple (input_nodes, hidden_layer_nodes + , output_nodes)”
Citations
Cites
Items 201–400 of 455
The UCI KDD archive of large data sets for data mining research and experimentation
Bay, S. D., Kibler, D. F., Pazzani, M. J., & Smyth, P. (2000) · ACM SIGKDD Explorations Newsletter · doi:10.1145/380995.381030 · Cited by 234
A Hybrid Malicious Code Detection Method based on Deep Learning
Li, Y., Ma, R., & Jiao, R. (2015) · International Journal of Security and Its Applications · doi:10.14257/ijsia.2015.9.5.21 · Cited by 229
TCP-Jersey for Wireless IP Communications
Xu, K. J., Tian, Y., & Ansari, N. (2004) · IEEE Journal on Selected Areas in Communications · doi:10.1109/jsac.2004.825989 · Cited by 227
Lal, T. N., Chapelle, O., Weston, J., & Elisseeff, A. (2008) · Studies in fuzziness and soft computing · doi:10.1007/978-3-540-35488-8_6 · Cited by 225
Intrusion detection in computer networks by a modular ensemble of one-class classifiers
Giacinto, G., Perdisci, R., Rio, M. D., et al. (2006) · Information Fusion · doi:10.1016/j.inffus.2006.10.002 · Cited by 219
Machine Learning for Cognitive Network Management
Ayoubi, S., Limam, N., Salahuddin, M. A., Shahriar, N., Boutaba, R., Estrada-Solano, F., & Caicedo, O. M. (2018) · IEEE Communications Magazine · doi:10.1109/mcom.2018.1700560 · Cited by 217
Self-citationWinning the KDD99 classification cup: bagged boosting
Pfahringer, B. (2000) · ACM SIGKDD Explorations Newsletter · doi:10.1145/846183.846200 · Cited by 216
Identifying and discriminating between web and peer-to-peer traffic in the network core
Erman, J., Mahanti, A., Arlitt, M., & Williamson, C. (2007) · Proceedings of the 16th international conference on World Wide Web · doi:10.1145/1242572.1242692 · Cited by 213
Fogla, P., Sharif, M., Perdisci, R., et al. (2006) · Cited by 213
Nichols, K. M., & Jacobson, V. L. (2012) · Queue · doi:10.1145/2208917.2209336 · Cited by 210
Learning while searching in constraint-satisfaction-problems
Dechter, R. (1986) · Cited by 206
Unexpected means of protocol inference
Ma, J., Levchenko, K., Kreibich, C., Savage, S., & Voelker, G. M. (2006) · Proceedings of the 6th ACM SIGCOMM conference on Internet measurement · doi:10.1145/1177080.1177123 · Cited by 204
Machine learning based encrypted traffic classification: Identifying SSH and Skype
Alshammari, R., & Zincir-Heywood, A. N. (2009) · 2009 IEEE Symposium on Computational Intelligence for Security and Defense Applications · doi:10.1109/cisda.2009.5356534 · Cited by 202
Hybrid Intelligent Intrusion Detection Scheme
Salama, M. A., Eid, H. F., Ramadan, R. Α., Darwish, A., & Hassanien, A. E. (2011) · Advances in intelligent and soft computing · doi:10.1007/978-3-642-20505-7_26 · Cited by 198
Failure prediction using machine learning and time series in optical network
Wang, Z., Zhang, M., Wang, D., Song, C., Liu, M., Li, J., Lou, L., & Liu, Z. (2017) · Optics Express · doi:10.1364/oe.25.018553 · Cited by 191
Detecting Application-Level Failures in Component-Based Internet Services
Kıcıman, E., & Fox, A. (2005) · IEEE Transactions on Neural Networks · doi:10.1109/tnn.2005.853411 · Cited by 182
An active learning based TCM-KNN algorithm for supervised network intrusion detection
Li, Y., & Guo, L. (2007) · Computers & Security · doi:10.1016/j.cose.2007.10.002 · Cited by 182
Dynamic application-layer protocol analysis for network intrusion detection
Dreger, H., Feldmann, A., Mai, M., Paxson, V., & Sommer, R. (2006) · MPG.PuRe (Max Planck Society) · Cited by 180
An adaptive optimal controller for discrete-time Markov environments
Witten, I. H. (1977) · Information and Control · doi:10.1016/s0019-9958(77)90354-0 · Cited by 180
cleverhans v0.1: an adversarial machine learning library.Preprint
Goodfellow, I., Papernot, N., & McDaniel, P. D. (2016) · arXiv (Cornell University) · Cited by 177
Internet Traffic Classification by Aggregating Correlated Naive Bayes Predictions
Zhang, J., Chen, C., Xiang, Y., Zhou, W., & Xiang, Y. (2013) · IEEE Transactions on Information Forensics and Security · doi:10.1109/tifs.2012.2223675 · Cited by 175
Intrusion detection using hierarchical neural networks
Zhang, C., Jiang, J., & Kamel, M. S. (2004) · Pattern Recognition Letters · doi:10.1016/j.patrec.2004.09.045 · Cited by 173
Machine Learning in Software Defined Networks: Data collection and traffic classification
Amaral, P., Dinis, J., Pinto, P., Bernardo, L., Tavares, J., & Mamede, H. S. (2016) · 2016 IEEE 24th International Conference on Network Protocols (ICNP) · doi:10.1109/icnp.2016.7785327 · Cited by 172
Multi-Valued and Universal Binary Neurons
Aizenberg, I. N., Aizenberg, N. N., & Vandewalle, J. (2000) · doi:10.1007/978-1-4757-3115-6 · Cited by 171
Learning Process in an Asymmetric Threshold Network
LeCun, Y. (1986) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-3-642-82657-3_24 · Cited by 170
A Hybrid Intelligent Approach for Network Intrusion Detection
Panda, M., Abraham, A., & Patra, M. R. (2012) · Procedia Engineering · doi:10.1016/j.proeng.2012.01.827 · Cited by 169
Prediction of cloud data center networks loads using stochastic and neural models
Prevost, J. J., Nagothu, K., Kelley, B., & Jamshidi, M. (2011) · 2011 6th International Conference on System of Systems Engineering · doi:10.1109/sysose.2011.5966610 · Cited by 169
The Optimal Control of Partially Observable Markov Decision Processes.
Sondik, E. J. (1971) · Medical Entomology and Zoology · Cited by 168
Soysal, M., & Schmidt, E. G. (2010) · Performance Evaluation · doi:10.1016/j.peva.2010.01.001 · Cited by 165
A clustering-based method for unsupervised intrusion detections
Jiang, S., Song, X., Wang, H., Han, J.-J., & Li, Q.-H. (2006) · Pattern Recognition Letters · doi:10.1016/j.patrec.2005.11.007 · Cited by 164
A Self-Learning Call Admission Control Scheme for CDMA Cellular Networks
Liu, D., Zhang, Y., & Zhang, H. (2005) · IEEE Transactions on Neural Networks · doi:10.1109/tnn.2005.853408 · Cited by 162
Proactive network fault detection
Hood, C. S., & Ji, C. (2002) · IEEE Conference on Computer Communications (INFOCOM) · doi:10.1109/infcom.1997.631137 · Cited by 158
Quality of Experience from user and network perspectives
Shaikh, J., Fiedler, M., & Collange, D. (2010) · annals of telecommunications - annales des télécommunications · doi:10.1007/s12243-009-0142-x · Cited by 157
Timely and Continuous Machine-Learning-Based Classification for Interactive IP Traffic
Nguyen, T. T. T., Armitage, G., Branch, P., & Zander, S. (2012) · IEEE/ACM Transactions on Networking · doi:10.1109/tnet.2012.2187305 · Cited by 156
A Framework for QoS-aware Traffic Classification Using Semi-supervised Machine Learning in SDNs
Wang, P., Lin, S.-C., & Luo, M. (2016) · 2016 IEEE International Conference on Services Computing (SCC) · doi:10.1109/scc.2016.133 · Cited by 155
A Machine Learning Approach for Efficient Traffic Classification
Li, W., & Moore, A. W. (2007) · 2007 15th International Symposium on Modeling, Analysis, and Simulation of Computer and Telecommunication Systems · doi:10.1109/mascots.2007.2 · Cited by 154
ATM communications network control by neural networks
Hiramatsu, A. (1990) · IEEE Transactions on Neural Networks · doi:10.1109/72.80211 · Cited by 152
Ivakhnenko, A. G., & Lapa, V. G. (1966) · CCM Information eBooks · Cited by 150
On the capability of an SOM based intrusion detection system
Kayacık, H. G., Zincir-Heywood, N., & Heywood, M. I. (2004) · doi:10.1109/ijcnn.2003.1223682 · Cited by 149
Why machine learning algorithms fail in misuse detection on KDD intrusion detection data set
Sabhnani, M., & Serpen, G. (2004) · Intelligent Data Analysis · doi:10.3233/ida-2004-8406 · Cited by 148
Multivariate Online Anomaly Detection Using Kernel Recursive Least Squares
Ahmed, T., Coates, M., & Lakhina, A. (2007) · IEEE INFOCOM 2007 - 26th IEEE International Conference on Computer Communications · doi:10.1109/infcom.2007.79 · Cited by 148
Using Feedback in Collaborative Reinforcement Learning to Adaptively Optimize MANET Routing
Dowling, J., Curran, E., Cunningham, R., & Cahill, V. (2005) · IEEE Transactions on Systems Man and Cybernetics - Part A Systems and Humans · doi:10.1109/tsmca.2005.846390 · Cited by 148
Moustapha, A. I., & Šelmić, R. R. (2008) · IEEE Transactions on Instrumentation and Measurement · doi:10.1109/tim.2007.913803 · Cited by 147
Reinforcement Learning in Autonomic Computing: A Manifesto and Case Studies
Tesauro, G. (2007) · IEEE Internet Computing · doi:10.1109/mic.2007.21 · Cited by 143
Predictive Q-Routing: A Memory-based Reinforcement Learning Approach to Adaptive Traffic Control
Choi, S. P. M., & Yeung, D. (1995) · doi:10.5555/2998828.2998961 · Cited by 140
TCP over multihop 802.11 networks: issues and performance enhancement
Nahm, K., Helmy, A., & Jay Kuo, C.-C. (2005) · Proceedings of the 6th ACM international symposium on Mobile ad hoc networking and computing · doi:10.1145/1062689.1062725 · Cited by 135
Automated Diagnosis for UMTS Networks Using Bayesian Network Approach
Khanafer, R. M., Solana, B., Triola, J., Barco, R., Moltsen, L., Altman, Z., & Lazaro, P. (2008) · IEEE Transactions on Vehicular Technology · doi:10.1109/tvt.2007.912610 · Cited by 135
Video streaming using a location-based bandwidth-lookup service for bitrate planning
Riiser, H., Endestad, T., Vigmostad, P., Griwodz, C., & Halvorsen, P. (2012) · ACM Transactions on Multimedia Computing Communications and Applications · doi:10.1145/2240136.2240137 · Cited by 134
Call admission control and routing in integrated services networks using neuro-dynamic programming
Marbach, P., Mihatsch, O., & Tsitsiklis, J. N. (2000) · IEEE Journal on Selected Areas in Communications · doi:10.1109/49.824797 · Cited by 134
A Machine Learning Approach to TCP Throughput Prediction
Mirza, M., Sommers, J., Barford, P., & Zhu, X. (2010) · IEEE/ACM Transactions on Networking · doi:10.1109/tnet.2009.2037812 · Cited by 132
Cognitive Networks: Towards Self‐Aware Networks
(2007) · doi:10.1002/9780470515143 · Cited by 132
KISS: Stochastic Packet Inspection Classifier for UDP Traffic
Finamore, A., Mellia, M., Meo, M., & Rossi, D. (2010) · IEEE/ACM Transactions on Networking · doi:10.1109/tnet.2010.2044046 · Cited by 130
Comparing Anomaly Detection Techniques for HTTP
Ingham, K. L., & Inoue, H. (2007) · Lecture notes in computer science · doi:10.1007/978-3-540-74320-0_3 · Cited by 128
An effective hop-by-hop Interest shaping mechanism for CCN communications
Rozhnova, N., & Fdida, S. (2012) · 2012 Proceedings IEEE INFOCOM Workshops · doi:10.1109/infcomw.2012.6193514 · Cited by 125
Genetic Algorithm to Improve SVM Based Network Intrusion Detection System
Kim, D. S., Nguyen, H.-N., & Park, J. S. (2005) · doi:10.1109/aina.2005.191 · Cited by 125
Thu, T. N. T., & Armitage, G. J. (2006) · Conference on Local Computer Networks · doi:10.1109/lcn.2006.322122 · Cited by 123
Support vector regression for link load prediction
Bermolen, P., & Rossi, D. (2009) · Computer Networks · doi:10.1016/j.comnet.2008.09.018 · Cited by 121
Internet Traffic Forecasting using Neural Networks
Cortez, P. C., Miguel Rio, C., Rocha, M., & Sousa, P. (2006) · International Joint Conference on Neural Networks (IJCNN) · doi:10.1109/ijcnn.2006.1716452 · Cited by 118
Internet Traffic Forecasting using Neural Networks
Cortez, P., Rio, M., Rocha, M., & Sousa, P. (2006) · The 2006 IEEE International Joint Conference on Neural Network Proceedings · doi:10.1109/ijcnn.2006.247142 · Cited by 118
Distinguishing congestion losses from wireless transmission losses: a negative result
Biaz, S., & Vaidya, N. H. (2002) · Proceedings/Proceedings - International Conference on Computer Communications and Networks · doi:10.1109/icccn.1998.998834 · Cited by 117
Team-partitioned, opaque-transition reinforcement learning
Stone, P., & Veloso, M. (1999) · Proceedings of the third annual conference on Autonomous Agents · doi:10.1145/301136.301195 · Cited by 114
Srihari, S. N., & Kuebert, E. J. (2002) · Proceedings of the International Conference on Document Analysis and Recognition · doi:10.1109/icdar.1997.620640 · Cited by 113
Revealing skype traffic: when randomness plays with you
Bonfiglio, D., Mellia, M., Meo, M., Rossi, D., & Tofanelli, P. (2007) · ACM SIGCOMM Computer Communication Review · doi:10.1145/1282427.1282386 · Cited by 112
Design and Evaluation of a Self-Learning HTTP Adaptive Video Streaming Client
Claeys, M., Latre, S., Famaey, J., & De Turck, F. (2014) · IEEE Communications Letters · doi:10.1109/lcomm.2014.020414.132649 · Cited by 111
Design and evaluation of learning algorithms for dynamic resource management in virtual networks
Mijumbi, R., Gorricho, J.-L., Serrat, J., Claeys, M., De Turck, F., & Latre, S. (2014) · 2014 IEEE Network Operations and Management Symposium (NOMS) · doi:10.1109/noms.2014.6838258 · Cited by 109
QUIC: A UDP-Based Secure and Reliable Transport for HTTP/2
Wilk, A., Iyengar, J., Swett, I., et al. (2016) · Cited by 108
Design and Deployment of a Passive Monitoring Infrastructure
Fraleigh, C., Diot, C., Lyles, B., et al. (2001) · Lecture notes in computer science · doi:10.1007/3-540-45400-4_36 · Cited by 107
TCP Congestion Avoidance Algorithm Identification
Yang, P., Shao, J., Luo, W., Xu, L., Deogun, J. S., & Lü, Y. (2013) · IEEE/ACM Transactions on Networking · doi:10.1109/tnet.2013.2278271 · Cited by 106
QRP05-4: Internet Traffic Identification using Machine Learning
Erman, J., Mahanti, A., & Arlitt, M. F. (2006) · Globecom · doi:10.1109/glocom.2006.443 · Cited by 106
A Modular Machine Learning System for Flow-Level Traffic Classification in Large Networks
Jin, Y., Duffield, N. G., Erman, J., Haffner, P., Sen, S. B., & Zhang, Z. (2012) · ACM Transactions on Knowledge Discovery from Data · doi:10.1145/2133360.2133364 · Cited by 103
Identification and Prediction of Internet Traffic Using Artificial Neural Networks
Chabaa, S., Zeroual, A., & Antari, J. (2010) · Journal of Intelligent Learning Systems and Applications · doi:10.4236/jilsa.2010.23018 · Cited by 102
Adaptive Opportunistic Routing for Wireless Ad Hoc Networks
Bhorkar, A. A., Naghshvar, M., Javidi, T., & Rao, B. D. (2012) · IEEE/ACM Transactions on Networking · doi:10.1109/tnet.2011.2159844 · Cited by 102
Learning and Adaptation in Cognitive Radios Using Neural Networks
Baldo, N., & Zorzi, M. (2008) · 2008 5th IEEE Consumer Communications and Networking Conference · doi:10.1109/ccnc08.2007.229 · Cited by 102
Predicting link quality using supervised learning in wireless sensor networks
Wang, Y., Martonosi, M., & Peh, L.-S. (2007) · ACM SIGMOBILE Mobile Computing and Communications Review · doi:10.1145/1317425.1317434 · Cited by 101
Intrusion Detection Using Ensemble of Soft Computing Paradigms
Mukkamala, S., Sung, A. H., & Abraham, A. (2003) · Intelligent Systems Design and Applications · doi:10.1007/978-3-540-44999-7_23 · Cited by 100
Empirical study based on machine learning approach to assess the QoS/QoE correlation
Mushtaq, M. S., Augustin, B., & Mellouk, A. (2012) · 2012 17th European Conference on Networks and Optical Communications · doi:10.1109/noc.2012.6249939 · Cited by 100
Online resource allocation using decompositional reinforcement learning
Tesauro, G. J. (2005) · Cited by 97
Dual Reinforcement Q-Routing: An On-Line Adaptive Routing Algorithm
Miikkulainen, S. K. A. R. (1997) · Cited by 97
Online flow size prediction for improved network routing
Poupart, P., Chen, Z., Jaini, P., Fung, F., Susanto, H., Geng, Y., Chen, L., Chen, K., & Jin, H. (2016) · 2016 IEEE 24th International Conference on Network Protocols (ICNP) · doi:10.1109/icnp.2016.7785324 · Cited by 96
A reinforcement learning approach to dynamic resource allocation
Vengerov, D. (2006) · Engineering Applications of Artificial Intelligence · doi:10.1016/j.engappai.2006.06.019 · Cited by 95
A Modal Search Technique for Predictive Nominal Scale Multivariate Analysis
Messenger, R. C., & Mandell, L. (1972) · Journal of the American Statistical Association · doi:10.1080/01621459.1972.10481290 · Cited by 95
Hybrid neural network and C4.5 for misuse detection
Pan, Z., Chen, S., Hu, G.-B., et al. (2004) · International Conference on Machine Learning and Cybernetics · doi:10.1109/icmlc.2003.1259925 · Cited by 94
Statistical Analysis of Network Traffic for Adaptive Faults Detection
Hajji, H. (2005) · IEEE Transactions on Neural Networks · doi:10.1109/tnn.2005.853414 · Cited by 93
Adaptive Routing for Sensor Networks using Reinforcement Learning
Wang, P., & Wang, T. (2006) · The Sixth IEEE International Conference on Computer and Information Technology (CIT'06) · doi:10.1109/cit.2006.34 · Cited by 92
TCP implementations and false time out detection in OBS networks
Yu, X., Qiao, C., & Liu, Y. (2005) · IEEE INFOCOM 2004 · doi:10.1109/infcom.2004.1356966 · Cited by 92
Machine Learning Approach for IP-Flow Record Anomaly Detection
Wagner, C., François, J., State, R., & Engel, T. (2011) · Lecture notes in computer science · doi:10.1007/978-3-642-20757-0_3 · Cited by 91
End-to-End Inference of Loss Nature in a Hybrid Wired/Wireless Environment
Liu, J., Matta, I., & Crovella, M. E. (2002) · Cited by 90
Khan, A., Sun, L., & Ifeachor, E. (2009) · International Conference on Communications · doi:10.1109/icc.2009.5198850 · Cited by 89
Using Collective Intelligence to Route Internet TrafficPreprint
Wolpert, D. H., Tumer, K., & Frank, J. E. (1999) · arXiv (Cornell University) · doi:10.48550/arxiv.cs/9905004 · Cited by 89
Tong, H., & Brown, T. X. (2000) · IEEE Journal on Selected Areas in Communications · doi:10.1109/49.824799 · Cited by 85
A Temporal-Difference Model of Classical Conditioning
Sutton, R. S., & Barto, A. G. (1987) · eScholarship (California Digital Library) · Cited by 84
Early Classification of Network Traffic through Multi-classification
Dainotti, A., Pescapè, A., & Sansone, C. (2011) · Lecture notes in computer science · doi:10.1007/978-3-642-20305-3_11 · Cited by 83
Caswell, B., & Beale, J. (2007) · Cited by 83
Alternative custodians for congestion control in delay tolerant networks
Seligman, M., Fall, K., & Mundur, P. (2006) · doi:10.1145/1162654.1162660 · Cited by 81
FROMS: Feedback Routing for Optimizing Multiple Sinks in WSN with Reinforcement Learning
Forster, A., & Murphy, A. L. (2007) · 2007 3rd International Conference on Intelligent Sensors, Sensor Networks and Information · doi:10.1109/issnip.2007.4496872 · Cited by 81
Active learning for network intrusion detection
Görnitz, N., Kloft, M., Rieck, K., et al. (2009) · doi:10.1145/1654988.1655002 · Cited by 80
Integration of ATM call admission control and link capacity control by distributed neural networks
Hiramatsu, A. (1991) · IEEE Journal on Selected Areas in Communications · doi:10.1109/49.103558 · Cited by 78
Internet Assigned Numbers Authority
National Cancer Institute (2020) · Definitions · doi:10.32388/iz89mh · Cited by 78
Design and optimisation of a (FA)Q-learning-based HTTP adaptive streaming client
Claeys, M., Latré, S., Famaey, J., Wu, T., Leekwijck, W. V., & Turck, F. D. (2014) · Connection Science · doi:10.1080/09540091.2014.885273 · Cited by 77
Proactive network-fault detection [telecommunications]
Hood, C. S., & Ji, C. (1997) · IEEE Transactions on Reliability · doi:10.1109/24.664004 · Cited by 77
Traffic prediction using neural networks
Yu, E. S., & Chen, C. Y. R. (2002) · Proceedings of GLOBECOM '93. IEEE Global Telecommunications Conference · doi:10.1109/glocom.1993.318226 · Cited by 77
On Internet Traffic Classification: A Two-Phased Machine Learning Approach
Bakhshi, T., & Ghita, B. (2016) · Journal of Computer Networks and Communications · doi:10.1155/2016/2048302 · Cited by 76
ATL: An Adaptive Transport Layer Suite for Next-Generation Wireless Internet
Akan, O. B., & Akyildiz, I. F. (2004) · IEEE Journal on Selected Areas in Communications · doi:10.1109/jsac.2004.826919 · Cited by 75
On User-Centric Modular QoE Prediction for VoIP Based on Machine-Learning Algorithms
Charonyktakis, P., Plakia, M., Tsamardinos, I., & Papadopouli, M. (2016) · IEEE Transactions on Mobile Computing · doi:10.1109/tmc.2015.2461216 · Cited by 75
Shi, R., Zhang, J., Chu, W., Bao, Q., Jin, X., Gong, C., Zhu, Q., Yu, C., & Rosenberg, S. (2015) · 2015 IEEE International Conference on Services Computing · doi:10.1109/scc.2015.19 · Cited by 74
Next Generation Intrusion Detection: Autonomous Reinforcement Learning of Network Attacks
Cannady, & James, D. (2000) · Cited by 73
Monitoring System Security Using Neural Networks and Support Vector Machines
Mukkamala, S., Janoski, G., & Sung, A. H. (2002) · Physica-Verlag eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-3-7908-1782-9_10 · Cited by 73
Predicting future traffic using Hidden Markov Models
Chen, Z., Wen, J., & Geng, Y. (2016) · 2016 IEEE 24th International Conference on Network Protocols (ICNP) · doi:10.1109/icnp.2016.7785328 · Cited by 72
A multi-level framework to identify HTTPS services
Shbair, W. M., Cholez, T., Francois, J., & Chrisment, I. (2016) · NOMS 2016 - 2016 IEEE/IFIP Network Operations and Management Symposium · doi:10.1109/noms.2016.7502818 · Cited by 69
A machine learning approach to improve congestion control over wireless computer networks
Geurts, P., El Khayat, I., & Leduc, G. (2004) · Fourth IEEE International Conference on Data Mining (ICDM'04) · doi:10.1109/icdm.2004.10063 · Cited by 68
Lin, Z., & van der Schaar, M. (2011) · IEEE Transactions on Wireless Communications · doi:10.1109/twc.2010.111910.091238 · Cited by 68
Ahn, C. W., & Ramakrishna, R. S. (2004) · IEEE Transactions on Vehicular Technology · doi:10.1109/tvt.2003.822000 · Cited by 68
Abacus: Accurate behavioral classification of P2P-TV traffic
Bermolen, P., Mellia, M., Meo, M., Rossi, D., & Valenti, S. (2011) · Computer Networks · doi:10.1016/j.comnet.2010.12.004 · Cited by 67
A weighted k-nearest neighbor method for gene ontology based protein function prediction
Kharsikar, S., Mugler, D. H., Sheffer, D. B., et al. (2007) · International Multi-Symposiums on Computer and Computational Sciences · doi:10.1109/imsccs.2007.61 · Cited by 67
APUNet: Revitalizing GPU as Packet Processing Accelerator
Go, Y., Jamshed, M. A., Moon, Y. S., et al. (2017) · Networked Systems Design and Implementation · Cited by 67
Reinforcement learning based spectrum-aware routing in multi-hop cognitive radio networks
Xia, B., Wahab, M. H., Yang, Y., Fan, Z., & Sooriyabandara, M. (2009) · 2009 4th International Conference on Cognitive Radio Oriented Wireless Networks and Communications · doi:10.1109/crowncom.2009.5189189 · Cited by 66
TCP Congestion Avoidance Algorithm Identification
Yang, P., Luo, W., Xu, L., Deogun, J. S., & Lü, Y. (2011) · Proceedings of the ... International Conference on Distributed Computing Systems/Proceedings of the International Conference on Distributed Computing Systems · doi:10.1109/icdcs.2011.27 · Cited by 65
Q-Probabilistic Routing in Wireless Sensor Networks
Arroyo-Valles, R., Alaiz-Rodriguez, R., Guerrero-Curieses, A., & Cid-Sueiro, J. (2007) · 2007 3rd International Conference on Intelligent Sensors, Sensor Networks and Information · doi:10.1109/issnip.2007.4496810 · Cited by 65
SABUL: A Transport Protocol for Grid Computing
Gu, Y., & Grossman, R. (2003) · Journal of Grid Computing · doi:10.1023/b:grid.0000037553.18581.3b · Cited by 64
Traffic identification engine: an open platform for traffic classification
de Donato, W., Pescapè, A., & Dainotti, A. (2014) · IEEE Network · doi:10.1109/mnet.2014.6786614 · Cited by 62
Content-Based Video Quality Prediction for MPEG4 Video Streaming over Wireless Networks
Khan, A., Sun, L., & Ifeachor, E. (2009) · Journal of Multimedia · doi:10.4304/jmm.4.4.228-239 · Cited by 59
QoE-Aware Admission Control for Multimedia Applications in IEEE 802.11 Wireless Networks
Piamrat, K., Ksentini, A., Viho, C., & Bonnin, J.-M. (2008) · 2008 IEEE 68th Vehicular Technology Conference · doi:10.1109/vetecf.2008.310 · Cited by 59
Traffic classification using probabilistic neural networks
Sun, R., Yang, B., Peng, L., et al. (2010) · International Conference on Natural Computation (ICNC) · doi:10.1109/icnc.2010.5584648 · Cited by 57
Internet Traffic Classification for Scalable QOS Provision
Park, J., Tyan, H.-R., & Kuo, C.-C. (2006) · 2006 IEEE International Conference on Multimedia and Expo · doi:10.1109/icme.2006.262757 · Cited by 56
Efficiency/friendliness tradeoffs in TCP Westwood
Wang, R., Valla, M., Sanadidi, M. Y., Ng, B., & Gerla, M. (2003) · IEEE Symposium on Computers and Communications (ISCC) · doi:10.1109/iscc.2002.1021694 · Cited by 55
(2008) · Elsevier eBooks · doi:10.1016/b978-1-59749-208-9.x0001-9 · Cited by 55
Lightweight application classification for network management
Jiang, H., Moore, A. W., Ge, Z., Jin, S., & Wang, J. (2007) · IEEE Internet Network Management Workshop · doi:10.1145/1321753.1321771 · Cited by 54
A Coupling Procedure for the Discrimination of Mixed Data
Wernecke, K. ‐. (1992) · Biometrics · doi:10.2307/2532305 · Cited by 54
Support Vector Machine Meets Software Defined Networking in IDS Domain
Boero, L., Marchese, M., & Zappatore, S. (2017) · International Teletraffic Congress · doi:10.23919/itc.2017.8065806 · Cited by 52
Condition monitoring of 3G cellular networks through competitive neural models
Barreto, G. A., Mota, J., Souza, L. G. M., et al. (2005) · IEEE Transactions on Neural Networks · doi:10.1109/tnn.2005.853416 · Cited by 50
ARBR: Adaptive reinforcement-based routing for DTN
Elwhishi, A., Ho, P.-H., Naik, K., & Shihada, B. (2010) · 2010 IEEE 6th International Conference on Wireless and Mobile Computing, Networking and Communications · doi:10.1109/wimob.2010.5645040 · Cited by 49
Digging into HTTPS: flow-based classification of webmail traffic
Schatzmann, D., Mühlbauer, W., Spyropoulos, T., & Dimitropoulos, X. (2010) · Proceedings of the 10th ACM SIGCOMM conference on Internet measurement · doi:10.1145/1879141.1879184 · Cited by 47
A connectionist approach to dynamic resource management for virtualised network functions
Mijumbi, R., Hasija, S., Davy, S., et al. (2016) · International Conference on Network and Service Management (CNSM) · doi:10.1109/cnsm.2016.7818394 · Cited by 47
(2014) · Machine Learning · doi:10.1002/9781119183464.ch1 · Cited by 46
Anomaly detection for diagnosis
Maxion, R. A. (2002) · doi:10.1109/ftcs.1990.89362 · Cited by 46
A neural-fuzzy system for congestion control in ATM networks
Lee, S.-J., & Hou, C.-L. (2000) · IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man and Cybernetics, Part B (Cybernetics) · doi:10.1109/3477.826942 · Cited by 45
Testolin, A., Zanforlin, M., De Filippo De Grazia, M., Munaretto, D., Zanella, A., Zorzi, M., & Zorzi, M. (2014) · 2014 13th Annual Mediterranean Ad Hoc Networking Workshop (MED-HOC-NET) · doi:10.1109/medhocnet.2014.6849102 · Cited by 45
Towards real-time processing for application identification of encrypted traffic
Kumano, Y., Ata, S., Nakamura, N., Nakahira, Y., & Oka, I. (2014) · 2012 International Conference on Computing, Networking and Communications (ICNC) · doi:10.1109/iccnc.2014.6785319 · Cited by 44
Empirical QoE/QoS correlation model based on multiple parameters for VoD flows
Aroussi, S., Bouabana-Tebibel, T., & Mellouk, A. (2012) · 2012 IEEE Global Communications Conference (GLOBECOM) · doi:10.1109/glocom.2012.6503403 · Cited by 44
A machine learning framework for TCP round-trip time estimation
Arouche Nunes, B. A., Veenstra, K., Ballenthin, W., Lukin, S., & Obraczka, K. (2014) · EURASIP Journal on Wireless Communications and Networking · doi:10.1186/1687-1499-2014-47 · Cited by 43
On exploiting traffic predictability in active queue management
Gao, Y., He, G., & Hou, J. C. (2003) · Annual Joint Conference of the IEEE Computer and Communications Societies (INFOCOM) · doi:10.1109/infcom.2002.1019416 · Cited by 41
A multi-agent Q-Learning-based framework for achieving fairness in HTTP Adaptive Streaming
Petrangeli, S., Claeys, M., Latré, S., Famaey, J., & Turck, F. D. (2014) · IEEE/IFIP Network Operations and Management Symposium (NOMS) · doi:10.1109/noms.2014.6838245 · Cited by 40
Jayaraj, A., Venkatesh, T., & Murthy, C. S. R. (2008) · IEEE Journal on Selected Areas in Communications · doi:10.1109/jsacocn.2008.033508 · Cited by 40
Enabling proactive self-healing by data mining network failure logs
Hashmi, U. S., Darbandi, A., & Imran, M. A. (2017) · 2012 International Conference on Computing, Networking and Communications (ICNC) · doi:10.1109/iccnc.2017.7876181 · Cited by 40
Ng, B., Hayes, M., & Seah, W. K. G. (2015) · IFIP Networking Conference (IFIP Networking) · doi:10.1109/ifipnetworking.2015.7145322 · Cited by 38
Hybrid Artificial Bee Colony Algorithm and Particle Swarm Search for Global Optimization
Chun-Feng, W., Kui, L., & Pei-Ping, S. (2014) · Mathematical Problems in Engineering · doi:10.1155/2014/832949 · Cited by 38 · cited 1×
“[500] propose a hybrid training algorithm that is based on global optimization, the PSO-ABC technique [98].”
MethodChakrabarti, S., Chakraborty, M., & Mukhopadhyay, I. (2010) · doi:10.1145/1741906.1741914 · Cited by 38
Proceedings of the International Workshop on Applications of Neural Networks to Telecommunications
(2013) · Psychology Press eBooks · doi:10.4324/9780203773826 · Cited by 37
Multi-Agent Reinforcement Learning for Intrusion Detection: A Case Study and Evaluation
Servin, A., & Kudenko⋆, D. (2008) · Lecture notes in computer science · doi:10.1007/978-3-540-87805-6_15 · Cited by 37
Sun, R., Tatsumi, S., & Zhao, G. (2004) · IEEE Region 10 Conference (TENCON) · doi:10.1109/tencon.2002.1181362 · Cited by 37
(2004) · Elsevier eBooks · doi:10.1016/b978-1-931836-08-1.x5000-9 · Cited by 36
A Connectionist Approach to Dynamic Resource Management for Virtualised Network Functions
Mijumbi, R., Hasija, S., Davy, S., et al. (2016) · Conference on Network and Service Management · doi:10.5555/3375069.3375070 · Cited by 36
Network bandwidth predictor (NBP): a system for online network performance forecasting
Eswaradass, A., Sun, X.-H., & Wu, M. (2006) · Sixth IEEE International Symposium on Cluster Computing and the Grid (CCGRID'06) · doi:10.1109/ccgrid.2006.72 · Cited by 35
Multi-Perspective Machine Learning a Classifier Ensemble Method for Intrusion Detection
Miller, S. T., & Busby-Earle, C. (2017) · International Conference on Machine Learning and Soft Computing (ICMLSC) · doi:10.1145/3036290.3036303 · Cited by 35
El Khayat, I., Geurts, P., & Leduc, G. (2010) · Wireless Networks · doi:10.1007/s11276-008-0129-y · Cited by 34
An efficient SVM-based method for multi-class network traffic classification
Jing, N., Yang, M., Cheng, S., Dong, Q., & Xiong, H. (2011) · IEEE International Performance, Computing, and Communications Conference · doi:10.1109/pccc.2011.6108074 · Cited by 34
Inter-data-center network traffic prediction with elephant flows
Li, Y., Liu, H., Yang, W., Hu, D., & Xu, W. (2016) · NOMS 2016 - 2016 IEEE/IFIP Network Operations and Management Symposium · doi:10.1109/noms.2016.7502814 · Cited by 34
Li, F., Sun, J., Zukerman, M., Liu, Z., Xu, Q., Chan, S., Chen, G., & Ko, K.-T. (2014) · Journal of Network and Computer Applications · doi:10.1016/j.jnca.2014.01.005 · Cited by 33
Machado, V. A., Silva, C. N., Oliveira, R. S., Melo, A. M., Silva, M., Frances, C. R. L., Costa, J. C. W. A., Vijaykumar, N. L., & Hirata, C. M. (2011) · 2011 IEEE Third Latin-American Conference on Communications · doi:10.1109/latincom.2011.6107419 · Cited by 32
Leonardi, E., Mellia, M., Horváth, Á., Muscariello, L., Niccolini, S., & Rossi, D. (2008) · IEEE Communications Magazine · doi:10.1109/mcom.2008.4481334 · Cited by 32
vTC: Machine Learning Based Traffic Classification as a Virtual Network Function
He, L., Xu, C., & Luo, Y. (2016) · Proceedings of the 2016 ACM International Workshop on Security in Software Defined Networks & Network Function Virtualization · doi:10.1145/2876019.2876029 · Cited by 31
An approximate dynamic programming approach to resource management in multi-cloud scenarios
Pietrabissa, A., Priscoli, F. D., Giorgio, A. D., et al. (2016) · International Journal of Control · doi:10.1080/00207179.2016.1185802 · Cited by 31
An Adaptive Neuron AQM for a Stable Internet
Sun, J., & Zukerman, M. (2007) · Lecture Notes in Computer Science · doi:10.1007/978-3-540-72606-7_72 · Cited by 30
A neural network controller for congestion control in ATM multiplexers
Habib, I., Tarraf, A., & Saadawi, T. (1997) · Computer Networks and ISDN Systems · doi:10.1016/s0169-7552(96)00099-2 · Cited by 30
Karami, A. (2015) · Journal of Network and Computer Applications · doi:10.1016/j.jnca.2015.05.017 · Cited by 29
Portolès-Comeras, M., Requena‐Esteso, M., Mangues‐Bafalluy, J., et al. (2006) · doi:10.1109/tridnt.2006.1649156 · Cited by 29
A Machine Learning-Based Framework for Building Application Failure Prediction Models
Pellegrini, A., Sanzo, P. D., & Avresky, D. R. (2015) · IEEE International Symposium on Parallel & Distributed Processing, Workshops and Phd Forum · doi:10.1109/ipdpsw.2015.110 · Cited by 29
TPOT-RL Applied to Network Routing
Stone, P. (2000) · Cited by 29
Cognitive Network Inference through Bayesian Network Analysis
Quer, G., Meenakshisundaram, H., Tamma, B., Manoj, B. S., Rao, R., & Zorzi, M. (2010) · 2010 IEEE Global Telecommunications Conference GLOBECOM 2010 · doi:10.1109/glocom.2010.5683282 · Cited by 29
NN-RED: an AQM mechanism based on neural networks
Hariri, B., & Sadati, N. (2007) · Electronics Letters · doi:10.1049/el:20071791 · Cited by 29
Learning-Based and Data-Driven TCP Design for Memory-Constrained IoT
Li, W., Zhou, F., Meleis, W., & Chowdhury, K. (2016) · 2016 International Conference on Distributed Computing in Sensor Systems (DCOSS) · doi:10.1109/dcoss.2016.8 · Cited by 29
Solving the App-Level Classification Problem of P2P Traffic Via Optimized Support Vector Machines
Wang, R., Liu, Y., Yang, Y., & Zhou, X. (2006) · Sixth International Conference on Intelligent Systems Design and Applications · doi:10.1109/isda.2006.253893 · Cited by 28
Clustering to Assist Supervised Machine Learning for Real-Time IP Traffic Classification
Nguyen, T. T. T., & Armitage, G. (2008) · International Conference on Communications · doi:10.1109/icc.2008.1095 · Cited by 28
Assessing dependability of wireless networks using neural networks
Snow, A., Rastogi, P., & Weckman, G. R. (2005) · IEEE Military Communications Conference (MILCOM) · doi:10.1109/milcom.2005.1606090 · Cited by 27
Bayesian packet loss detection for TCP
I'onseca, N., & Crovella, M. (2005) · Proceedings IEEE 24th Annual Joint Conference of the IEEE Computer and Communications Societies. · doi:10.1109/infcom.2005.1498462 · Cited by 27
Smart Experts for Network State Estimation
Edalat, Y., Ahn, J.-S., & Obraczka, K. (2016) · IEEE Transactions on Network and Service Management · doi:10.1109/tnsm.2016.2586506 · Cited by 27
Boost Online Virtual Network Embedding: Using Neural Networks for Admission Control
Blenk, A., Kalmbach, P., van der Smagt, P., et al. (2016) · Conference on Network and Service Management · doi:10.5555/3375069.3375071 · Cited by 27
Comparative Analysis of Clustering Techniques in Network Traffic Faults Classification
Qader, K. H., Adda, M., & Alkasassbeh, M. S. (2017) · International Journal of Innovative Research in Computer and Communication Engineering · doi:10.15680/ijircce.2017.0504001 · Cited by 26
Fault prediction and reliability analysis in a real cellular network
Kumar, Y., Farooq, H., & Imran, A. (2017) · 2017 13th International Wireless Communications and Mobile Computing Conference (IWCMC) · doi:10.1109/iwcmc.2017.7986437 · Cited by 26
Unsupervised deep learning for real-time assessment of video streaming services
Vega, M. T., Mocanu, D. C., & Liotta, A. (2017) · Multimedia Tools and Applications · doi:10.1007/s11042-017-4831-6 · Cited by 25
Multimedia QoE optimized management using prediction and statistical learning
Elkotob, M., Grandlund, D., Andersson, K., & Ahlund, C. (2010) · IEEE Local Computer Network Conference · doi:10.1109/lcn.2010.5735733 · Cited by 23
A Generic Quantitative Relationship to Assess Interdependency of QoE and QoS
(2013) · KSII Transactions on Internet and Information Systems · doi:10.3837/tiis.2013.02.009 · Cited by 23
Operational Fault Detection in cellular wireless base-stations
Rao, S. A. (2006) · IEEE Transactions on Network and Service Management · doi:10.1109/tnsm.2006.4798311 · Cited by 22
Adeel, A., Larijani, H., Javed, A., & Ahmadinia, A. (2015) · 2015 IEEE 81st Vehicular Technology Conference (VTC Spring) · doi:10.1109/vtcspring.2015.7145764 · Cited by 21
Network Traffic Prediction based on Particle Swarm BP Neural Network
Zhu, Y. F., Zhang, G., & Qiu, J. (2013) · Journal of Networks · doi:10.4304/jnw.8.11.2685-2691 · Cited by 21
Congestion control mechanism for ATM networks using neural networks
Tarraf, A. A., Habib, I. W., & Saadawi, T. N. (2002) · Proceedings IEEE International Conference on Communications ICC '95 · doi:10.1109/icc.1995.525166 · Cited by 21
Demirbilek, E., & Grégoire, J. (2017) · ACM Transactions on Multimedia Computing Communications and Applications · doi:10.1145/3051482 · Cited by 21
Predictive fault management in the dynamic environment of IP networks
Ding, J., KRÄMER, B. J., Xu, S., et al. (2005) · doi:10.1109/ipom.2004.1547622 · Cited by 20
Improving TCP in Wireless Networks with an Adaptive Machine-Learnt Classifier of Packet Loss Causes
El Khayat, I., Geurts, P., & Leduc, G. (2005) · Lecture Notes in Computer Science · doi:10.1007/11422778_44 · Cited by 20
Neural-network connection-admission control for ATM networks
Cheng, R.-G., & Chang, C.-J. (1997) · IEE Proceedings - Communications · doi:10.1049/ip-com:19971088 · Cited by 20
A supervised learning approach to cognitive access point selection
Bojović, B., Baldo, N., Nin-Guerrero, J., et al. (2011) · IEEE Globecom Workshops (GC Wkshps) · doi:10.1109/glocomw.2011.6162348 · Cited by 20
Venkata Ramana, B., Manoj, B. S., & Siva Ram Murthy, C. (2005) · 2nd International Conference on Broadband Networks, 2005. · doi:10.1109/icbn.2005.1589652 · Cited by 20
On-line adaptation of a signal predistorter through dual reinforcement learning
Goetz, P., Kumar, S., & Miikkulainen, R. P. (1996) · Cited by 20
Smart Congestion Control for Delay- and Disruption Tolerant Networks
Silva, A. P., Obraczka, K., Burleigh, S., & Hirata, C. M. (2016) · 2016 13th Annual IEEE International Conference on Sensing, Communication, and Networking (SECON) · doi:10.1109/sahcn.2016.7733018 · Cited by 20
Proceedings of the 2005 ACM SIGCOMM workshop on Mining network data
Sen, S., Ji, C., Saha, D., et al. (2005) · Cited by 20
Heuristic Congestion Control for Message Deletion in Delay Tolerant Network
Leela-amornsin, L., & Esaki, H. (2010) · Lecture Notes in Computer Science · doi:10.1007/978-3-642-14891-0_26 · Cited by 19
IAPI: An intelligent adaptive PI active queue management scheme
Sun, J., Chan, S., & Zukerman, M. (2012) · Computer Communications · doi:10.1016/j.comcom.2012.07.013 · Cited by 19
Research works printed but not linked: 31
- ACM Special Interest Group on KDD. KDD cup archives. 2016. http://www.kdd.org/kdd-cup . Accessed 22 Nov 2017.
- Barman D, Matta I. Model-based loss inference by tcp over heterogeneous networks. In: Proceedings of WiOpt 2004 Modeling and Optimization in Mobile, Ad Hoc and Wireless Networks. Cambridge: 2004. p. 364–73.
- Brakmo LS, O’Malley SW, Peterson LL. Tcp vegas: New techniques for congestion detection and avoidance. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Communications Architectures, Protocols and Applications, ACM, New York, NY, USA, SIGCOMM ’94. New York: ACM: 1994. p. 24–35.
- Brauckhoff D, Wagner A, May M. FLAME: A flow-level anomaly modeling engine. In: Proceedings of the conference on Cyber security experimentation and test (CSET). Berkley: USENIX Association: 2008. p. 1.
- Breiman L, Friedman J, Stone C, Olshen R. Classification and Regression Trees. The Wadsworth and Brooks-Cole statistics-probability series. New York: Taylor & Francis; 1984.
- Bryson A, Ho Y. Applied optimal control: optimization, estimation and control. Blaisdell book in the pure and applied sciences. Waltham: Blaisdell Pub. Co; 1969.
- Bryson AE. A gradient method for optimizing multi-stage allocation processes. In: Harvard University Symposium on Digital Computers and their Applications. Boston: 1961. p. 72.
- Cannady J. Artificial neural networks for misuse detection. In: Proceedings of the 21st National information systems security conference, vol. 26. Virginia: 1998. p. 368–81.
- Dagum P, Galper A, Horvitz EJ. Temporal Probabilistic Reasoning: Dynamic Network Models for Forecasting. Stanford: Knowledge Systems Laboratory, Medical Computer Science, Stanford University; 1991.
- Demirbilek E, Grégoire JC. INRS audiovisual quality dataset.ACM; 2016, pp. 167–71. · DOI
- Goodfellow I, Bengio Y, Courville A. Deep Learning.MIT Press; 2016. http://www.deeplearningbook.org .
- Haining W. An economical broadband network with high added value. In: Evolving the Access Network, International Engineering Consortium. Chicago: International Engineering Consortium: 2006. p. 67–70.
- He Q, Shayman MA. Using reinforcement learning for proactive network fault management. In: Proceedings of the International Conference on Communication Technologies.1999.
- Hinton GE, McClelland JL, Rumelhart DE. Parallel distributed processing: Explorations in the microstructure of cognition, vol. 1 In: Rumelhart DE, McClelland JL, PDP Research Group C, editors. Parallel Distributed Processing: Explorations in the Microstructure of Cognition. Cambridge, MA, USA, chap Distributed Representations: MIT Press: 1986. p. 77–109.
- Juniper Research. Cybercrime will cost businesses over $2 trillion by 2019. 2015. https://www.juniperresearch.com/press/press-releases/cybercrime-cost-businesses-over-2trillion . Accessed 10 Nov 2017.
- Kim H, Claffy KC, Fomenkov M, Barman D, Faloutsos M, Lee K. Internet traffic classification demystified: myths, caveats, and the best practices.ACM; 2008, p. 11. · DOI · Paper page
- Laplace PS. Théorie analytique des probabilités. Paris: Courcier; 1812.
- Markov AA. An example of statistical investigation in the text of eugene onegin illustrating coupling of tests in chains. In: Proceedings of the Royal Academy of Sciences of St. Petersburg, St. Petersburg, Rusia, vol 1.1913. p. 153.
- Mitchell TM. Machine Learning, 1st ed. New York: McGraw-Hill, Inc.; 1997.
- Moradi M, Zulkernine M. A neural network based system for intrusion detection and classification of attacks. In: Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Advances in Intelligent Systems-Theory and Applications.2004. p. 15–8.
- Nguyen T, Armitage G. Synthetic sub-flow pairs for timely and stable ip traffic identification. In: Proc. Australian Telecommunication Networks and Application Conference.2006a.
- Papernot N, Goodfellow I, Sheatsley R, Feinman R, McDaniel P. cleverhans v1. 0.0: an adversarial machine learning library. 2016. arXiv preprint arXiv:161000768.
- Quinlan J. Discovering rules form large collections of examples: A case study. Edingburgh: Expert Systems in the Micro Electronic Age Edinburgh Press; 1979.
- Quinlan JR. Learning with continuous classes. In: Proceedings of Australian Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, World Scientific.1992. p. 343–8.
- Quinlan JR, et al, Vol. 1. Bagging, boosting, and c4. 5; 1996. 725–30.
- Ruiz M, Fresi F, Vela AP, Meloni G, Sambo N, Cugini F, Poti L, Velasco L, Castoldi P. Service-triggered failure identification/localization through monitoring of multiple parameters. In: ECOC 2016; 42nd European Conference on Optical Communication: Proceedings of. VDE: 2016. p. 1–3.
- Smolensky P. Parallel distributed processing: Explorations in the microstructure of cognition, vol. 1 In: Rumelhart DE, McClelland JL, PDP Research Group C, editors. Parallel Distributed Processing: Explorations in the Microstructure of Cognition, Vol. 1„ MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, USA, chap Information Processing in Dynamical Systems: Foundations of Harmony Theory.1986. p. 194–281.
- Steinhaus H. Sur la division des corp materiels en parties. Bull Acad Polon Sci. 1956; 1:801–4.
- Sun J, Chan S, Ko Kt, Chen G, Zukerman M. Neuron pid: A robust aqm scheme. In: Proceedings of the Australian Telecommunication Networks and Applications Conference (ATNAC) 2006.2006. p. 259–62.
- UCI KDD Archive. 2005. https://kdd.ics.uci.edu/ . Accessed 01 Aug 2017.
- Watkins CJ. Models of delayed reinforcement learning. PhD thesis: Psychology Department, Cambridge University; 1989.
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Federated Learning in Mobile Edge Networks: A Comprehensive Survey
Lim, W. Y. B., Luong, N. C., Hoang, D. T., Jiao, Y., Liang, Y.-C., Yang, Q., Niyato, D., & Miao, C. (2020) · IEEE Communications Surveys & Tutorials · doi:10.1109/comst.2020.2986024 · Cited by 2,565
Application of deep reinforcement learning to intrusion detection for supervised problems
Lopez-Martin, M., Carro, B., & Sanchez-Esguevillas, A. (2020) · Expert Systems with Applications · doi:10.1016/j.eswa.2019.112963 · Cited by 360
Energy Demand Prediction with Federated Learning for Electric Vehicle Networks
Saputra, Y. M., Hoang, D. T., Nguyen, D. N., Dutkiewicz, E., Mueck, M. D., & Srikanteswara, S. (2019) · 2019 IEEE Global Communications Conference (GLOBECOM) · doi:10.1109/globecom38437.2019.9013587 · Cited by 277
Machine Learning for Security in Vehicular Networks: A Comprehensive Survey
Talpur, A., & Gurusamy, M. (2022) · IEEE Communications Surveys & Tutorials · doi:10.1109/comst.2021.3129079 · Cited by 107
Software engineering challenges for machine learning applications: A literature review
Kumeno, F. (2020) · Intelligent Decision Technologies · doi:10.3233/idt-190160 · Cited by 81
Metadata
- Authors
- Boutaba, R., Salahuddin, M. A., Limam, N., Ayoubi, S., Shahriar, N., Estrada-Solano, F., & Caicedo, O. M.
- Affiliations
- University of Waterloo (CA)
- Corresponding author
- Boutaba, Raouf
- Venue
- Journal of Internet Services and Applications
- Publisher
- Sociedade Brasileira de Computação
- Published
- 2018-06-21
- Volume
- 9
- Issue
- 1
- ISSN
- 1867-4828 (ISSN-L)
- 1869-0238
- OpenAlex
- W2809684781
- Cited by
- 1,036
- References
- 455
- Citations by year
- 2026: 73 · 2025: 94 · 2024: 120 · 2023: 123 · 2022: 153 · 2021: 197 · 2020: 160 · 2019: 106 · 2018: 10
- FWCI
- 73.03
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
- doi.org
- Licence
- Locations
- Journal of Internet Services and Applications (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
- Funders
- Departamento Administrativo de Ciencia, Tecnología e Innovación (COLCIENCIAS) (647‐2014)
- Royal Bank of Canada
- Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
- Fonds de recherche du Québec – Nature et technologies
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Networks and Communications › Software-Defined Networks and 5G
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Networks and Communications › Network Security and Intrusion Detection
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Networks and Communications › Network Traffic and Congestion Control
- Keywords
- network management, traffic prediction, routing, network traffic classification, congestion control, resource management, fault management, quality of service, quality of experience, network security, autonomic networks, learning paradigms
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
A language model drew the claims from the paper on 2026-10-10, under version 3 of the claim definition (model deepseek-v4.1-flash, prompt extract-v3).
A second model labelled each claim on 2026-10-10 (model jev-1.13-20260917, definition revision gold-guideline-v0.2).
Cited sources are checked with a language model’s help (gpt-6-sol).
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review