Power and cost aware localized routing with guaranteed delivery in unit graph based ad hoc networks
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
Abstract In a localized routing algorithm, each node currently holding a message makes forwarding decision solely based on the position information about itself, its neighbors and destination. In a unit graph, two nodes can communicate if and only if the distance between them is no more than the transmission radius, which is the same for each node. This paper proposes localized routing algorithms, aimed at minimizing total power for routing a message or maximizing the total number of routing tasks that a network can perform before a partition. The algorithms are combinations of known greedy power and/or cost aware localized routing algorithms and an algorithm that guarantees delivery. A shortcut procedure is introduced in later algorithm to enhance its performance. Another improvement is to restrict the routing to nodes in a dominating set. These improvements require two‐hop knowledge at each node. The efficiency of proposed algorithms is verified experimentally by comparing their power savings, and the number of routing tasks a network can perform before a node loses all its energy, with the corresponding shortest weighted path algorithms and localized algorithms that use fixed transmission power at each node. Significant energy savings are obtained, and feasibility of applying power and cost‐aware localized schemes is demonstrated. Copyright © 2004 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 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 it