MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1992166214 · doi:10.1109/wcnc.2013.6554598

An enhanced cooperative MAC protocol based on perceptron training

2013· article· en· W1992166214 on OpenAlexaff
Peijian Ju, Wei Song, Dizhi Zhou

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicCooperative Communication and Network Coding
Canadian institutionsUniversity of New Brunswick
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceComputer networkRelayHandshakingNetwork packetThroughputPerceptronRobustness (evolution)Hidden node problemWirelessNode (physics)Distributed computingWireless networkMachine learningArtificial neural networkTelecommunicationsEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cooperation among wireless nodes at the medium access control (MAC) layer has attracted a lot of research attention in recent years. Most of existing cooperative MAC protocols focus on the scenarios with static helpers (relay nodes). However, when the helpers are moving around, the source node may choose a leaving helper with out-of-date information, which could cause performance deterioration. Hence, an optimal helper should not only support a high transmission rate but also have a low mobility. It can be a challenging problem to distinguish such an optimal helper when there are moving helpers of various mobility. In this paper, we extend the cooperative MAC protocol in [1] by means of perceptron training, referred to as PTCoopMAC. Making use of the handshaking messages in the original CoopMAC protocol, PTCoopMAC collects history data on the signal strength of overheard packets. Then, PTCoopMAC applies the perceptron training technique to obtain a weight vector to examine the stability of the helpers. Extending the CoopTable, PTCoopMAC selects the optimal helper depending on the achievable data rate as well as the prediction on whether a helper is reliable. The simulations results well demonstrate the throughput improvement of PTCoopMAC and its robustness to high mobility of helper nodes.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.974
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.054
GPT teacher head0.332
Teacher spread0.277 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations13
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicCooperative Communication and Network CodingFrench-language works237,207