%0 Conference Proceedings
%T Impact of Dynamics on Situated and Global Aggregation Schemes
%+ Environnement de Réseaux Autonomes (ERA)
%+ Equipe MAD - Laboratoire GREYC - UMR6072
%A Makhloufi, Rafik
%A Doyen, Guillaume
%A Bonnet, Grégory
%A Gaïti, Dominique
%Z Part 5: P2P and Aggregation Schemes
%< avec comité de lecture
%( Lecture Notes in Computer Science
%B 5th Autonomous Infrastructure, Management and Security (AIMS)
%C Nancy, France
%Y Isabelle Chrisment
%Y Alva Couch
%Y Rémi Badonnel
%Y Martin Waldburger
%I Springer
%3 Managing the Dynamics of Networks and Services
%V LNCS-6734
%N Part V
%P 148-159
%8 2011-06-13
%D 2011
%R 10.1007/978-3-642-21484-4_17
%K agregation protocols
%K autonomic networking
%K experimentations
%Z Computer Science [cs]/Artificial Intelligence [cs.AI]
%Z Computer Science [cs]/Multiagent Systems [cs.MA]
%Z Computer Science [cs]/Modeling and SimulationConference papers
%X Recently, numerous management approaches have emerged in order to manage networks and services in a decentralized and autonomous way. Some of them propose to minimize their cost by using a situated view when collecting aggregates for the decision making process, while others propose to improve their accuracy by using a more conventional approach which is global view. So far, little attention is given to the evaluation of situated view while many studies propose to evaluate global approaches. As a consequence, there is no work in the literature that compares the performance of situated and global aggregation schemes. Being able to choose the suitable approach for a given context is still a real challenge. Mastering it will ensure the e fficiency of the autonomous management system. In this paper, we present a comparative study of situated and global schemes deployed over large scale and dynamic networks. We consider two factors: network and information dynamics. We implement typical aggregation schemes from each category and then we compare them according to the accuracy of the estimated aggregates and the e ciency of the decision making process.
%G English
%Z TC 6
%2 https://hal.science/hal-00951994/document
%2 https://hal.science/hal-00951994/file/BONNET_AIMS11.pdf
%L hal-00951994
%U https://hal.science/hal-00951994
%~ CNRS
%~ UNIV-TROYES
%~ GREYC
%~ GREYC-MAD
%~ IFIP-LNCS
%~ IFIP
%~ COMUE-NORMANDIE
%~ IFIP-TC
%~ IFIP-TC6
%~ TDS-MACS
%~ IFIP-AIMS
%~ IFIP-2010
%~ IFIP-LNCS-6734
%~ ENSICAEN
%~ UNICAEN
%~ UTT
%~ UTT-LIST3N
%~ UTT-GESTION
%~ UTT-FULL-TEXT
%~ ERA-UTT
%~ LIST3N-RECY