Demonstration venue · read-only. Every page can be browsed; the buttons that would change it are switched off. Create an account to run TaxoReview on your own data. A simulation from public publication records: the people listed were not invited and did not agree to review.
? Tutorial for this page

Eyal Gordon

dblp:10/2340 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
3ranked-venue papers
2as first author
0since 2021 · last 2010
—ORCID · none

Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several

Systems, architecture and hardware · 1 · 1 first-authorGraphics, computer vision, multimedia, augmented reality and games · 1Theory of computation · 1 · 1 first-author

Expertise — from the expertise taxonomy: the topics of the expert's papers under the CCF categories. A weight counts papers with recency: 1 for a paper about the topic, 0.3 when the topic is its context, halved every five years.

Computer networks
2 papers
Wireless networking · 32% Routing and switching · 32% Internet architecture and protocols · 21%
Theoretical computer science
1 paper
Approximation and online algorithms · 100%

Topics — the 7 heaviest of 7, each with the papers that count most for it

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Wireless networking › network capacity
competitive network throughput
0.112010
Competitive weighted throughput analysis of greedy protocols on DAGs · ACM Trans. Algorithms 2010
Routing and switching › routing
packet routing
0.112010
Competitive weighted throughput analysis of greedy protocols on DAGs · ACM Trans. Algorithms 2010
Approximation and online algorithms › online algorithms
competitive analysis
0.112010
Competitive weighted throughput analysis of greedy protocols on DAGs · ACM Trans. Algorithms 2010
Approximation and online algorithms
online algorithms
0.112010
Competitive weighted throughput analysis of greedy protocols on DAGs · ACM Trans. Algorithms 2010
Internet architecture and protocols
packet scheduling
0.112005
Competitive weighted throughput analysis of greedy protocols on DAGs · PODC 2005
Network optimization and economics
throughput maximization
0.112005
Competitive weighted throughput analysis of greedy protocols on DAGs · PODC 2005
Internet architecture and protocols
quality of service
0.012005
Competitive weighted throughput analysis of greedy protocols on DAGs · PODC 2005

Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics

upper and lower bounds · 0.2competitive ratio · 0.2online algorithm · 0.1competitive analysis · 0.1
YearPublicationVenuePosition
2010 Competitive weighted throughput analysis of greedy protocols on DAGs
abstract
The combination of the buffer sizes of routers deployed in the Internet, and the Internet traffic itself, leads routinely to the dropping of packets. Motivated by this, we are interested in the problem of maximizing the throughput of protocols that control packet networks. Moreover, we are interested in a setting where different packets have different priorities (or weights), thus taking into account Quality-of-Service considerations. We first extend the Competitive Network Throughput (CNT) model introduced by Aiello et al. [2003] to the weighted packets case. We analyze the performance of online, local-control protocols by their competitive ratio, in the face of arbitrary traffic, using as a measure the total weight of the packets that arrive to their destinations, rather than being dropped en-route. We prove that on Directed Acyclic Graphs (DAGs), any greedy protocol is competitive, with competitive ratio independent of the weights of the packets. Here we mean by a “greedy protocol” a protocol that not only does not leave a resource idle unnecessarily, but also prefers packets with higher weight over those with lower weight. We give two independent upper bounds on the competitive ratio of general greedy protocols on DAGs. We further give lower bounds that show that our upper bounds cannot be improved (other than constant factors) in the general case. Both our upper and lower bounds apply also to the unweighted case, and they improve the results given in Aiello et al. [2003] for that case. We thus give tight (up to constant factors) upper and lower bounds for both the unweighted and weighted cases. In the course of proving our upper bounds we prove a lemma that gives upper bounds on the delivery times of packets by any greedy protocol on general DAGs (without buffer size considerations). We believe that this lemma may be of independent interest and may find additional applications.
Eyal Gordon, Adi Rosén
ACM Trans. Algorithms1
2005 Competitive weighted throughput analysis of greedy protocols on DAGs
abstract
The combination of the buffer sizes of routers deployed in the Internet, and the Internet traffic itself, leads routinely to the dropping of packets. Motivated by this, we are interested in the problem of maximizing the throughput of protocols that control packet networks. Moreover, we are interested in a setting where different packets have different priorities (or weights), thus taking into account Quality-of-Service considerations.We first extend the Competitive Network Throughput (CNT) model introduced by Aiello et al. [2] to the weighted packets case. We analyze the performance of online, local-control protocols by their competitive ratio, in the face of arbitrary traffic, using as a measure the total weight of the packets that arrive to their destinations, rather than being dropped en-route. We prove that on directed acyclic graphs (DAGs), any greedy protocol is competitive, with competitive ratio independent of the weights of the packets. We give two independent upper bounds on the competitive ratio of general greedy protocols on DAGs. We further give lower bounds that show that our upper bounds cannot be improved (other than constant factors) in the general case. Both our upper and lower bounds apply also to the unweighted case, and they improve the results given in [2] for that case. We thus give tight (up to constant factors) upper and lower bounds for both the unweighted and weighted cases.In the course of proving our upper bounds we prove a lemma that gives upper bounds on the delivery times of packets by any greedy protocol on general DAGs (without buffer size considerations). We believe that this lemma may be of independent interest and may find additional applications.
Eyal Gordon, Adi Rosén
PODC1
2004 Fusion of 2D and 3D data in three-dimensional face recognition
abstract
We discuss the synthesis between the 3D and the 2D data in three-dimensional face recognition. We show how to compensate for the illumination and racial expressions using the 3D facial geometry and present the approach of canonical images, which allows us to incorporate geometric information into standard face recognition approaches.
Alexander M. Bronstein, Michael M. Bronstein, Eyal Gordon, Ron Kimmel
ICIP3