MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2101454514 · doi:10.1109/ccece.2003.1226229

Network congestion control in ad hoc IEEE 802.11 wireless LAN

2004· article· en· W2101454514 on OpenAlexaff
Yuning Dong, Dimitrios Makrakis, T. Sullivan

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicWireless Networks and Protocols
Canadian institutionsNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer networkComputer scienceWireless ad hoc networkWireless lanIEEE 802.11Network congestionIEEE 802.11sMobile ad hoc networkService setIEEE 802.11w-2009Ad hoc wireless distribution serviceOptimized Link State Routing ProtocolWireless networkWirelessWi-Fi arrayTelecommunicationsWireless mesh networkNetwork packet

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

An IEEE 802.11 based ad hoc wireless LAN (WLAN) is formed by a set of wireless stations communicating directly with each other without using centralized administration. Ad hoc WLANs are prone to network congestion due to the bursty nature of the data traffic, synchronization difficulties in self-coordination, and the dynamics of the wireless channel. Therefore, wireless stations may experience low throughput and long latency under the circumstance of network congestion, which is especially harmful for real-time traffic. In this paper, a set of preliminary simulations and analysis are conducted to obtain a thorough understanding on the origin of network congestion. We then discuss how to capture the syndrome of network congestion. Note that the occupation rate on buffer, which is employed in active queue management (AQM) algorithms such as random early drop (RED) to predict network congestion, is not appropriate in ad hoc WLANs. New mechanisms suitable for a distributed and contention-based wireless networks are needed. We provide some alternative new designs. We use the optimized network (OPNET) simulator to evaluate the performance of the proposed algorithms and assess their ability in terms of supporting the QoS level set by the applications.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.240
Teacher spread0.226 · 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

Citations12
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicWireless Networks and ProtocolsFrench-language works237,207