The Probability Distribution of the Carrier-to-Interference Ratio (CIR) of a CSMA/CA Ad Hoc Wireless Network
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This work is first in the open literature to characterize the probability distribution (not merely the mean and variance) of the carrier-to-interference ratio (CIR) of an ad hoc CSMA/CA wireless communication network, via Monte Carlo simulations. This paper is also first in the open literature to model an ad hoc network accounting for all following factors: (1) more realistically modeling of the network nodes' spatial distribution via a two-dimensional Poisson process whereby network nodes are randomly placed at arbitrary two-dimensional plane (instead of nodes locating deterministically at only regular grid points), (2) suppression of nodes within the carrier sensing range of a transmitting node to micmac the CSMA/CA medium access control (MAC) protocol (i.e. nodes self-restrain from transmission when neighboring a transmitting node), (3) microscopic Rayleigh fading, (4) propagation-distance-dependent path-loss and (5) more than one service class. Monte Carlo simulations of a CSMA/CA ad hoc network generate CIR data, whose probability distribution function and parameters are identified via least-squares curve-fitting. The inverse normal distribution is the most well-rounded distribution, in the sense of providing a good fit (if not the best fit) to all nine Monte-Carlo simulation scenarios. The Rayleigh is the best univariate pdf. It can fit all scenarios very well, except the case without micro-fading and low pathless. All pdf's can sufficiently fit the data when k=4 Nakagami is the best bivariate pdf with LMSE les1, except the case without micro-fading and low-pathloss (with distance-dependent power-loss exponent k=2). The bivariate Nakagami improves over the best univariate fit (namely, Rayleigh). The trivariate Fisk & quadravariate Burr can fit all scenarios with LMSE les 1. The quadravariate Burr often cuts the trivariate Fisks LMSE by half. The trivariate Fisk cuts the bivariate inverted-normals LMSE often by 2/3
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".