MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2104733185 · doi:10.1109/music.2012.25

Efficient Group Key Management in Wireless LANs

2012· article· en· W2104733185 on OpenAlexaff
Celia Li, Uyen Trang Nguyen

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicSecurity in Wireless Sensor Networks
Canadian institutionsYork University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer networkComputer scienceLatency (audio)MulticastKey (lock)TelecommunicationsComputer security

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Group key management (GKM) refers to the actions taken to update and distribute the group key upon members joining and leaving a multicast/broadcast group. The GKM scheme defined in the IEEE 802.11 WLAN standards is not efficient because the re-keying latency grows linearly with the number of clients connected to an access point. In this paper, we apply the logical key hierarchy (LKH) and one-way function tree (OFT) algorithms to GKM in WLANs to improve its performance. Our numerical analyses show that the LKH and OFT algorithms reduce the re-keying latency of GKM in WLANs to logarithmic time.

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)0.005
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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.004
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.012
GPT teacher head0.231
Teacher spread0.219 · 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

Citations0
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicSecurity in Wireless Sensor NetworksFrench-language works237,207