MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2133845767 · doi:10.1109/wiopt.2011.5930037

Joint routing, scheduling, and network coding for wireless multihop networks

2011· article· en· W2133845767 on OpenAlexaff
Samat Shabdanov, Catherine Rosenberg, Patrick Mitran

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicCooperative Communication and Network Coding
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLinear network codingComputer scienceMaximum throughput schedulingUnicastComputer networkScheduling (production processes)Wireless networkSignal-to-interference-plus-noise ratioDistributed computingWireless mesh networkWirelessCoding (social sciences)ThroughputMathematical optimizationDynamic priority schedulingRound-robin schedulingMulticastMathematicsTelecommunicationsQuality of service

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper presents a study on achievable throughput in wireless multihop networks with unicast flows that use XOR-like network coding. A joint routing, scheduling, and network coding problem is formulated under a realistic signal to interference plus noise ratio interference model. This formulation provides a mathematical framework to study the achievable throughput of a given wireless network for a given utility function. We optimally solve it for max-min throughput in small to medium size networks by developing an efficient computation tool. Our numerical results show that throughput gains can be obtained at low transmission powers by using simple XOR-like network coding in a mesh-like network provided it is optimally configured in terms of routing, scheduling, and network coding but that they are only significant (i.e., greater than 15%) for some special cases. We also compute max-min throughput by restricting network coding to some key nodes or flows to quantify key conditions that provide a significant portion of gains.

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)0.006
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 score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.082
GPT teacher head0.275
Teacher spread0.193 · 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

Citations30
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicCooperative Communication and Network CodingFrench-language works237,207