OSPF-MCDS-MC: a routing protocol for multi-channel wireless ad-hoc networks
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We present an innovative routing protocol that utilizes multiple channels to improve performance in a mobile ad hoc network. The basic idea of the design is to provide nodes with the ability to use multiple channels effectively so that multiple useful transmissions can occur simultaneously, thus improving network capacity. The proposed scheme requires minor changes to existing proactive or table-driven routing protocols and no modifications to current the IEEE 802.11 medium access control protocol. To avoid inefficiencies due to transmission of periodic updates in proactive routing protocols, the proposed scheme divides the network layer into control and data planes. To demonstrate the multi-channel routing scheme, we extend the OSPF-MCDS routing protocol to a multi-channel version, OSPF- MCDS-MC. Simulation results indicate that OSPF-MCDS-MC successfully exploits multiple channels to improve network capacity. The routing protocol allows the network goodput to increase in proportion to the number of available channels, even as the number of nodes and network load increase, in both single- hop and multiple-hop networks.
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 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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".