Effect of HELLO interval duration on stable routing for mobile ad hoc networks
Bibliographic record
Abstract
As the demand for mobile ad hoc wireless network (MANET) applications grows there is a need to research how to maintain the quality of the connections in such networks where communication is performed without a fixed infrastructure. Compared to static wireless networks, little academic research has been done on message overhead control in MANETs. In this paper, we are particularly concerned with position-based MANETs where, as part of the MANET protocols to maintain nodes' lists of current neighbors, at regular intervals all nodes send HELLO beacon messages containing their ID and current position information to their neighbors. Since the choice of the duration of the HELLO message interval can not be arbitrary, the interval size is one of the significant issues that needs be investigated further to make communication reliable in MANETs. Therefore, we study the effect of varying the length of the time interval on two contrasting types of greedy-based stable routing protocols for MANETs, one using backup paths and the other using a conservative neighborhood range, in terms of the number of control messages exchanged and throughput for the protocols.
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 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 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".