Receiver Consensus: On-time Warning Delivery for Vehicular Ad-hoc Networks
Bibliographic record
Abstract
To improve safety, a warning message in VANETs should be delivered both reliably and urgently. Existing solutions either tend to compromise propagation delay or do not reach high reliability due to broadcast storm problem caused by excessive retransmissions. We propose ReC, which exploits geographical information to help nodes autonomously achieve agreement on forwarding strategies. Each forwarding candidate ranks itself and its neighbors (who affirmatively or potentially received the message already) by distance to the centroid of neighbors in need of message, to assign different priority in forwarding among neighboring nodes and remarkably suppress unnecessary retransmission, while enabling best nodes to transmit the packet without waiting. The effectiveness and efficiency of this method is validated through extensive simulations under 802.11p settings. The results demonstrate that the proposed protocol achieves the high reliability of leading state-of-the-art solutions, while at the same time significantly enhances timeliness, dedicating itself to disseminating emergency messages in 2D vehicular networks.
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.001 |
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".