Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Machine learning-based QOT prediction for self-driven optical networks

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Neural Computing and Applications Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Nowadays, digital businesses with diverse deployment models such as cloud, mobile and edge devices for the internet of things will impact traffic, in both volume and dynamicity, at unprecedented rates. Moreover, due to the recent advances in optical networks and systems, the complexity of provisioning lightpaths is growing dramatically. Hence, optical network operators are forced to change their insight and move toward intent-based and self-driven networking, to cost-efficiently accommodate these challenging requirements. In this regard, knowledge-defined networking (KDN) promises to play a paramount role in realizing flexible and self-driven optical networks. In this work, we focus on one of the key aspects in this environment, i.e., prediction of quality of service for unestablished lightpaths. KDN is a solution that introduces machine learning techniques into the control plane of the network, to cope with inevitable complexities that arise in enabling network to operate autonomously and faster. For this, five machine learning models are evaluated for the classification and regression approaches. Multilayer perceptron, radial basis function and generalized regression neural network (GRNN) models are used for both of the regression and classification approaches, while support-vector machine and probabilistic neural network (PNN) models are used only for the classification scenario. Also, to discard the redundant features (among the considered experimental features) in the classification approach, input features are selected using the analysis of variance (ANOVA) test. The proposed models can accelerate and handle a significant part of operations in the closed-loop architecture of knowledge-defined optical networks, as a paradigm for designing self-driven optical networks. The best accuracies of quality of transmission prediction (classification approach) and optical signal-to-noise ratio estimation (regression approach) are achieved using PNN (with average accuracy of 99.6 ± 0.5%) and GRNN (with R-squared value of 0.957), respectively.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Mestres A, Rodriguez-Natal A, Carner J, Barlet-Ros P, Alarcón E, Solé M, Muntés-Mulero V, Meyer D, Barkai S, Hibbett MJ, Estrada G, Máruf K, Coras F, Ermagan V, Latapie H, Cassar C, Evans J, Maino F, Walrand J, Cabellos A (2017) Knowledge-defined networking. ACM SIGCOMM Comput Commun Rev 47(3):2–10

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Clark D, Partridge C, Ramming C, Wroclawski J (2003) A knowledge plane for the Internet. In: Conference on applications, technologies, architectures, and protocols for computer communications (SIGCOMM)

  3. Musumeci F, Rottondi C, Nag A, Macaluso I, Zibar D, Ruffini M, Tornatore M (2018) An overview on application of machine learning techniques in optical networks. IEEE Commun Surv Tutor. https://doi.org/10.1109/comst.2018.2880039

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Mecozzi A, Essiambre R (2012) Nonlinear Shannon limit in pseudolinear coherent systems. J Lightwave Technol 30(12):2011–2024. https://doi.org/10.1109/jlt.2012.2190582

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Poggiolini P (2012) The GN model of non-linear propagation in uncompensated coherent optical systems. J Lightwave Technol 30(24):3857–3879. https://doi.org/10.1109/jlt.2012.2217729

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Rabbani H, Beygi L, Ghoshooni S, Rabbani H, Agrell E (2018) Quality of transmission aware optical networking using enhanced Gaussian noise model. J Lightwave Technol. https://doi.org/10.1109/jlt.2018.2881607

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Shao J, Liang X, Kumar S (2014) Comparison of split-step fourier schemes for simulating fiber optic communication systems. IEEE Photon J 6(4):1–15. https://doi.org/10.1109/jphot.2014.2340993

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Sartzetakis I, Christodoulopoulos K, Tsekrekos C, Syvridis D, Varvarigos E (2016) Quality of transmission estimation in WDM and elastic optical networks accounting for space-spectrum dependencies. J Opt Commun Netw 8(9):676. https://doi.org/10.1364/jocn.8.000676

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Carena A, Bosco G, Curri V, Jiang Y, Poggiolini P, Forghieri F (2014) EGN model of non-linear fiber propagation. Opt Express 22(13):16335. https://doi.org/10.1364/oe.22.016335

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Soumplis P, Christodoulopoulos K, Quagliotti M, Pagano A, Varvarigos E (2017) Network planning with actual margins. J Lightwave Technol 35(23):5105–5120. https://doi.org/10.1109/jlt.2017.2743461

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Pointurier Y (2016) Design of low-margin optical networks. J Opt Commun Netw 9(1):A9. https://doi.org/10.1364/jocn.9.0000a9

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Vejdannik M, Sadr A, de Albuquerque VHC, Tavares JMRS (2018) Signal processing for NDE. In Ida N, Meyendorf N (eds) Handbook of advanced non-destructive evaluation. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-30050-4_53-1

  13. Vejdannik M, Sadr A (2015) Application of linear discriminant analysis to ultrasound signals for automatic microstructural characterization and classification. J Signal Process Syst 83(3):411–421. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11265-015-1029-x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Vejdannik M, Sadr A (2016) Automatic microstructural characterization and classification using dual tree complex wavelet-based features and Bees Algorithm. Neural Comput Appl 28(7):1877–1889. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00521-016-2188-9

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Vejdannik M, Sadr A (2016) Automatic microstructural characterization and classification using higher-order spectra on ultrasound signals. Journal of Nondestructive Evaluation. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10921-015-0332-6

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Vejdannik M, Sadr A (2016) Automatic microstructural characterization and classification using probabilistic neural network on ultrasound signals. J Intell Manuf 29(8):1923–1940. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10845-016-1225-y

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Sartzetakis I, Christodoulopoulos K, Varvarigos E (2019) Accurate quality of transmission estimation with machine learning. J Opt Commun Netw 11(3):140. https://doi.org/10.1364/jocn.11.000140

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Christodoulopoulos K, Sartzetakis I, Soumplis P, Varvarigos E (2020) Machine learning assisted quality of transmission estimation and planning with reduced margins. Opt Netw Des Model 1:211–222. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-38085-4_19

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Panayiotou T, Savva G, Tomkos I, Ellinas G (2019) Centralized and distributed machine learning-based QoT estimation for sliceable optical networks. arXiv:1908.08338 [cs.NI]

  20. Rottondi C, Barletta L, Giusti A, Tornatore M (2018) Machine-learning method for quality of transmission prediction of unestablished lightpaths. J Opt Commun Netw 10(2):A286–A297

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Aladin S, Tremblay C (2018) Cognitive tool for estimating the QoT of new lightpaths. In: Optical fiber communication conference (OFC), paper M3A.3

  22. Morais R, Pedro J (2018) Machine learning models for estimating quality of transmission in DWDM networks. J Opt Commun Netw 10(10):D84. https://doi.org/10.1364/jocn.10.000d84

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Caballero F, Ives D, Zhuge Q, O’Sullivan M, Savory SJ (2018) Joint estimation of linear and non-linear signal-to-noise ratio based on neural networks. In: Optical fiber communication conference (OFC), paper M2F.4

  24. Caballero F et al (2018) Machine learning based linear and nonlinear noise estimation. J Opt Commun Netw 10(10):D42. https://doi.org/10.1364/jocn.10.000d42

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Mo W, Gutterman C, Li Y, Zhu S, Zussman G, Kilper D (2018) Deep-neural-network-based wavelength selection and switching in ROADM systems. J Opt Commun Netw 10(10):D1. https://doi.org/10.1364/jocn.10.0000d1

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Wolpert D (1996) The lack of a priori distinctions between learning algorithms. Neural Comput 8(7):1341–1390. https://doi.org/10.1162/neco.1996.8.7.1341

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Simon H (2008) Neural networks. Prentice-Hall of India, New Delhi

    Google Scholar 

  28. Cox D, Donnelly C (2011) Principles of applied statistics. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    Book  Google Scholar 

  29. Ancona F, Colla A, Rovetta S, Zunino R (1997) Implementing probabilistic neural networks. Neural Comput Appl 5(3):152–159. https://doi.org/10.1007/bf01413860

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Mestres A et al (2017) Knowledge-defined networking. ACM SIGCOMM Comput Commun Rev 47(3):2–10. https://doi.org/10.1145/3138808.3138810

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Iran University of Science and Technology (IUST), Tehran, Iran

    Masoud Vejdannik & Ali Sadr

Authors
  1. Masoud Vejdannik
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Ali Sadr
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ali Sadr.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors report no conflicts of interest. The authors alone are responsible for the content and writing of this article.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Vejdannik, M., Sadr, A. Machine learning-based QOT prediction for self-driven optical networks. Neural Comput & Applic 33, 2919–2928 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00521-020-05123-y

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00521-020-05123-y

Keywords

Search

Navigation