MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2095187794 · doi:10.1504/ijsnet.2008.019255

Skipping technique in face routing for wireless ad hoc and sensor networks

2008· article· en· W2095187794 on OpenAlexaff
Jie Lian, Kshirasagar Naik

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Sensor Networks · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAntenna Design and Analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceDynamic Source RoutingComputer networkTree traversalStatic routingGeographic routingRouting protocolLink-state routing protocolWireless Routing ProtocolDestination-Sequenced Distance Vector routingDistributed computingRouting (electronic design automation)Policy-based routingRouting tableZone Routing ProtocolMultipath routingScalabilityAlgorithmDatabase

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Greedy routing and face routing route data by using location information of nodes to solve scalability problem incurred in table-driven routing. Greedy routing efficiently routes data in dense networks, but it does not guarantee message delivery. Face routing has been designed to achieve guaranteed message delivery. Face routing, however, is not efficient in terms of routing path length. In this paper, we present a Skipping Face Routing (SFR) protocol to reduce the face traversal cost incurred in the existing approaches. In SFR, we specify a set of sufficient conditions so that each node can determine if it can skip some intermediate nodes during face traversing based solely on the neighbour information of the node, resulting in reduced total number of transmissions. By using simulation studies, we show that SFR significantly reduces the communication cost and traversal time required in face traversal compared with the existing approaches.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.013
GPT teacher head0.231
Teacher spread0.218 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations9
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Sensor NetworksSame topicAntenna Design and AnalysisFrench-language works237,207