Exploiting channel-aware reputation system against selective forwarding attacks in WSNs
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Wireless sensor networks (WSNs) are vulnerable to selective forwarding attacks that selectively drop a subset of the forwarding packets to degrade network performances. Due to unstable wireless channels, the packet loss rate between sensor nodes might be high, especially in hostile environments. Therefore, it is difficult to distinguish the malicious drop and normal packet loss. In this paper, we propose a Channel-aware deputation System (CRS) to identify selective forwarding misbehaviours from normal packet losses caused by poor channel quality or medium access collision. Specifically, CRS is based on normal packet loss estimation and neighbour monitoring. Each node maintains a reputation table to evaluate forwarding behaviours of its neighbours. Reputation value is determined by the deviation of the monitored packet loss rate and estimated normal loss rate. The nodes with reputation below a threshold are identified as misbehaving nodes and isolated from data forwarding paths. Furthermore, we develop weighted reputation propagation and integration functions to improve detection efficiency. Through theoretical analysis and extensive simulations, we demonstrate that CRS can accurately detect selective forwarding attacks and significantly improve the network throughput.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".