A multipath QoS routing protocol in 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
Most of the proposed routing protocols for Wireless Sensor Networks (WSNs) concentrate on efficiently using constrained resources, especially the energy. However, one important factor of the routing protocols, QoS routing, has not been paid enough attention. Transmission collision appears frequently at nodes that receive packets from multiple nodes. Consequently, the network performance is greatly reduced. Furthermore, frequent collisions increase delay, which is important to real-time applications. The services provided by the sensor network are also impacted. In this paper, we propose a mechanism to find multiple paths between one sink and multiple sources with the consideration of reducing collision. We take advantage of the mass deployment of sensor nodes to search for disjoint paths for multiple source nodes in order to avoid collisions. Besides the increase in the network lifetime and throughput, the protocol also decreases the latency. Simulation results are provided to demonstrate the effectiveness of our solution.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| 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