MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1990096938 · doi:10.1145/1143549.1143667

Bottleneck-first scheduling for real-time traffic in IEEE 802.11 infrastructure-based mesh networks

2006· article· en· W1990096938 on OpenAlexaff
Jun Zou, Dongmei Zhao

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicWireless Networks and Protocols
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceComputer networkBottleneckWireless mesh networkRound-robin schedulingScheduling (production processes)Network packetDynamic priority schedulingFair-share schedulingDistributed computingReal-time computingWireless networkWirelessEngineeringEmbedded systemTelecommunicationsQuality of service

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper studies the real-time traffic scheduling in IEEE 802.11 infrastructure-based wireless mesh networks. Providing strict latency guarantee for real-time traffic in a wireless mesh network is difficult, and one of the main challenges is the difficulty in coordinating temporal operations of the mesh access points (APs). In this paper we propose a bottleneck-first scheduling scheme (BFS) for voice traffic. In the proposed scheme, a central station is responsible for making scheduling decisions for all the real-time packet transmissions at the APs. Scheduling decisions at the APs with a higher traffic load are done before those with a lower traffic load. At each AP, voice packets with more end-to-end hops are scheduled first. Numerical results show that the proposed scheduling scheme achieves low transmission delay and high capacity in the mesh networks, compared to the simple first-come-first-serve scheduling scheme.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.018

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.009
GPT teacher head0.232
Teacher spread0.223 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicWireless Networks and ProtocolsFrench-language works237,207