Chain-Based Communication in Cylindrical Underwater Wireless Sensor 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
Appropriate network design is very significant for Underwater Wireless Sensor Networks (UWSNs). Application-oriented UWSNs are planned to achieve certain objectives. Therefore, there is always a demand for efficient data routing schemes, which can fulfill certain requirements of application-oriented UWSNs. These networks can be of any shape, i.e., rectangular, cylindrical or square. In this paper, we propose chain-based routing schemes for application-oriented cylindrical networks and also formulate mathematical models to find a global optimum path for data transmission. In the first scheme, we devise four interconnected chains of sensor nodes to perform data communication. In the second scheme, we propose routing scheme in which two chains of sensor nodes are interconnected, whereas in third scheme single-chain based routing is done in cylindrical networks. After finding local optimum paths in separate chains, we find global optimum paths through their interconnection. Moreover, we develop a computational model for the analysis of end-to-end delay. We compare the performance of the above three proposed schemes with that of Power Efficient Gathering System in Sensor Information Systems (PEGASIS) and Congestion adjusted PEGASIS (C-PEGASIS). Simulation results show that our proposed 4-chain based scheme performs better than the other selected schemes in terms of network lifetime, end-to-end delay, path loss, transmission loss, and packet sending rate.
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