MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2096331657 · doi:10.1109/icc.2006.255765

Non-Cooperative Transmission Game in Wireless Networks with Multipacket Reception and Packet Priority

2006· article· en· W2096331657 on OpenAlexaff
Minh Ngo, Vikram Krishnamurthy

Bibliographic record

Venue2006 IEEE International Conference on Communications · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicWireless Networks and Protocols
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNetwork packetComputer scienceTransmission (telecommunications)Computer networkNash equilibriumTelecommunications linkChannel (broadcasting)Wireless sensor networkWirelessMathematical optimizationTelecommunicationsMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We consider the uplink of random access multipacket reception wireless sensor networks where packets may have different priorities. Each sensor aims to optimize its transmission policy, which maps instantaneous channel states and packet priorities to transmit probabilities, to maximize its individual reward. The problem is formulated as a non-cooperative game. We show that the optimal transmission policies have a special structure: given a packet priority, it is optimal for a sensor to transmit with certainty if its channel state is beyond a certain threshold and not to transmit otherwise. We prove that there exists a Nash equilibrium profile at which every sensor deploys a transmission policy of this structure. A convergent stochastic approximation algorithm is proposed for estimating the best response transmission policy for any sensor. The theoretical results and the performance of the proposed algorithm are illustrated via numerical examples.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.930
Threshold uncertainty score0.686

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.043
GPT teacher head0.315
Teacher spread0.272 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations0
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venue2006 IEEE International Conference on CommunicationsSame topicWireless Networks and ProtocolsFrench-language works237,207