Evaluation of a Load Profiling Approach to Routing Guaranteed Bandwidth Flows

To support the diverse Quality of Service (QoS) requirements of real-time (e.g. audio/video) applications in integrated services networks, several routing algorithms that allow for the reservation of the needed bandwidth over a Virtual Circuit (VC) established on one of several candidate routes have been proposed. Traditionally, such routing is done using the least-loaded concept, and thus results in balancing the load across the set of candidate routes. In a recent study, we have established the inadequacy of this load balancing practice and proposed the use of load profiling as an alternative. Load profiling techniques allow the distribution of "available" bandwidth across a set of candidate routes to match the characteristics of incoming VC QoS requests. In this paper we thoroughly characterize the performance of VC routing using load profiling and contrast it to routing using load balancing and load packing. We do so both analytically and via extensive simulations of multi-class traffic routing in Virtual Path (VP) based networks. Our findings confirm that for routing guaranteed bandwidth flows in VP networks, load balancing is not desirable as it results in VP bandwidth fragmentation, which adversely affects the likelihood of accepting new VC requests. This fragmentation is more pronounced when the granularity of VC requests is large. Typically, this occurs when a common VC is established to carry the aggregate traffic flow of many high-bandwidth real-time sources. For VP-based networks, our simulation results show that our load-profiling VC routing scheme performs better or as well as the traditional load-balancing VC routing in terms of revenue under both skewed and uniform workloads. Furthermore, load-profiling routing improves routing fairness by proactively increasing the chances of admitting high-bandwidth connections.

Evaluation of Speaker Normalization Methods for Vowel Recognition Using Fuzzy ARTMAP and K-NN

A procedure that uses fuzzy ARTMAP and K-Nearest Neighbor (K-NN) categorizers to evaluate intrinsic and extrinsic speaker normalization methods is described. Each classifier is trained on preprocessed, or normalized, vowel tokens from about 30% of the speakers of the Peterson-Barney database, then tested on data from the remaining speakers. Intrinsic normalization methods included one nonscaled, four psychophysical scales (bark, bark with end-correction, mel, ERB), and three log scales, each tested on four different combinations of the fundamental (Fo) and the formants (F1 , F2, F3). For each scale and frequency combination, four extrinsic speaker adaptation schemes were tested: centroid subtraction across all frequencies (CS), centroid subtraction for each frequency (CSi), linear scale (LS), and linear transformation (LT). A total of 32 intrinsic and 128 extrinsic methods were thus compared. Fuzzy ARTMAP and K-NN showed similar trends, with K-NN performing somewhat better and fuzzy ARTMAP requiring about 1/10 as much memory. The optimal intrinsic normalization method was bark scale, or bark with end-correction, using the differences between all frequencies (Diff All). The order of performance for the extrinsic methods was LT, CSi, LS, and CS, with fuzzy AHTMAP performing best using bark scale with Diff All; and K-NN choosing psychophysical measures for all except CSi.