MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2134627619 · doi:10.1109/wcnc.2008.565

A Novel Fair Incentive Protocol for Mobile Ad Hoc Networks

2008· article· en· W2134627619 on OpenAlex
Rongxing Lu, Xiaodong Lin, Haojin Zhu, Chenxi Zhang, Pin‐Han Ho, Xuemin Shen

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicMobile Ad Hoc Networks
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIncentiveComputer networkMobile ad hoc networkComputer scienceSelfishnessWireless ad hoc networkNode (physics)Optimized Link State Routing ProtocolProtocol (science)Network packetComputer securityRouting protocolMicroeconomicsWirelessTelecommunicationsEconomicsEngineeringLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

To enhance the overall performance of a mobile ad hoc network (MANET), people have tried to solve the issue of node selfishness, which has sparked a surge of research interests in credit-based incentive protocols. The core idea of credit-based incentive is to provide incentives for selfish nodes to faithfully forward packets in a MANET. Recently, several credit-based incentive protocols have been proposed. However, the fairness issue in those reported credit-based incentive protocols has never been well addressed yet. Without the fairness guarantees, the whole network still cannot reach its optimum cooperative status. Therefore, in this paper, aiming at fairness, we first define the fairness principle for credit-based incentive protocol, and then present a novel fair incentive protocol (FIP) for MANETs.

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.

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: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.645
Threshold uncertainty score0.744

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 communication0.0000.001
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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.283
Teacher spread0.254 · 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

Quick stats

Citations28
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicMobile Ad Hoc NetworksFrench-language works237,207