Priority scheduling in mobile ad hoc networks with improved bandwidth utilization
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
Studies of ad hoc wireless networks are a relatively new field gaining more popularity for various new applications. In these networks, the Medium Access Control (MAC) protocols are responsible for coordinating the access from active nodes. These protocols are of significant importance since the wireless communication channel is inherently prone to errors and unique problems such as the hidden-terminal problem, the exposed-terminal problem, and signal fading effects. This scheme is to perform a priority scheduling in wireless ad-hoc networks, with full utilization of the bandwidth available, mitigating the loss of packets incurred by the mobility of the nodes in the network. Here, two narrow busy tone packets are used to indicate the notification of a transmission by a high priority node, thus resolving the contention of the channel. Courtesy Piggybacking scheme exploits the channel dynamics and its basic idea is to let the high priority traffic help the low priority traffic by sharing unused residual bandwidth with courtesy.
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 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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