A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities

Boutaba, Raouf; Salahuddin, Mohammad A.; Limam, Noura; Ayoubi, Sara; Shahriar, Nashid; Estrada-Solano, Felipe; Caicedo, Oscar M.

doi:10.1186/s13174-018-0087-2

Journal of Internet Services and Applications

Table 10 Summary of packet loss classification using offline training at end-systems of the network

From: A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: evolution, applications and research opportunities

Ref.	ML Technique	Network	Dataset	Features	Classification	Evaluation
						Settings	Results
Liu et al. [282]	Unsupervised: · EM for HMM	Hybrid wired and wireless	Synthetic data: · ns-2 simulation · 4-linear topology Data distribution: · Training = 10k	· Loss pair RTT	· Congestion loss · Wireless loss	· 4-state HMM · Gaussian variables · Viterbi inference	HMM accuracy^a: ·44−98%
Barman and Matta [38]	Unsupervised: · EM for HMM	Hybrid wired and wireless	Synthetic data: · ns-2 simulation · Topology: - 4-linear - Dumbbell	· Loss pair delay · Loss probabilities: - Congestion - Wireless (nw)nw: network support	· Congestion loss · Wireless loss	· 2-state HMM · Gaussian variables · Bayesian inference · Discretized values: - 10 symbols	HMM accuracy^a: ·92−98%
El Khayat et al. [129, 130, 163]	Supervised: · Boosting DT · DT · RF · Bagging DT · Extra-trees · MLP-NN ·k-NN	Hybrid wired and wireless	Synthetic data: · Simulation in: - ns-2 - BRITE ·> 1k random topologies Data distribution: · Training = 25k· Testing = 10k	40 features applying avg, stdev, min, and max on parameters: · One-way delay · IAT And on packets: · 3 following loss · 1 before loss · 1/2 before RTT [130] finds that adding the number of losses is insignificant	· Congestion loss · Wireless loss	Ensemble DT: · 25 trees NN: · 40 input neurons · 2 hidden layers with 30 neurons · 1 output neuron · LMA^b learning k-NN: ·k=7	AUC (%)^c: · 98.40 · 94.24 · 98.23 · 97.96 · 98.13 · 97.61 · 95.41
Fonseca and Crovella [150]	Supervised: · Bayesian	Wired	Real data: · PMA project · BU Web server	· Loss pair RTT	· Congestion loss · Reordering	· Gaussian variables · 0 to 3 historic samples	In PMA: · TPR = 80% · FPR = 40% In BU: · TPR = 90% · FPR = 20%
Jayaraj et al. [214]	Unsupervised: · EM for HMM · EM-clustering	Optical	Synthetic data: · ns-2 simulation · NSFNET topology Data distribution: · Training = 25k· Testing = 15k	· Number of bursts between failures	· Congestion loss · Contention loss	HMM: · 8 states · Gaussian variables · Viterbi inference · 26 EM iterations Clustering: · 8 clusters · 24 EM iterations	CV^c: ·0.16−0.42·0.15−0.28 HMM accuracy^a: ·86−96%

^aVaries according to HMM prior estimates and network simulation settings (e.g. loss rate, error model, delay, traffic)
^bLevenberg-Marquardt Algorithm (LMA)
^cRespectively to the list of elements in the column ML technique

Back to article page