Co-UWSN: Cooperative Energy-Efficient Protocol for Underwater WSNs
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Sensor networks feature low-cost sensor devices with wireless network capability, limited transmit power, resource constraints, and limited battery energy. Cooperative routing exploits the broadcast nature of wireless medium and transmits cooperatively using nearby sensor nodes as relays. It is a promising technique that utilizes cooperative communication to improve the communication quality of single-antenna sensor nodes. In this paper, we propose a cooperative transmission scheme for underwater sensor networks (UWSNs) to enhance the network performance. Cooperative diversity has been introduced to combat fading. Cooperative UWSN (Co-UWSN) is proposed, which is a reliable, energy-efficient, and high throughput routing protocol for UWSN. Destination and potential relays are selected that utilize distance and signal-to-noise ratio computation of the channel conditions as cost functions. This contributes to sufficient decrease in path losses occurring in the links and transferring of data with much reduced path loss. Simulation results show that Co-UWSN protocol performs better in terms of end-to-end delay, energy consumption, and network lifetime. Selected protocols for comparison are energy-efficient depth-based routing (EEDBR), improved adaptive mobility of courier nodes in threshold-optimized depth-based routing (iAMCTD), cooperative routing protocol for UWSN, and cooperative partner node selection criteria for cooperative routing Coop (Re and dth).
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.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 it