Hop reservation multiple access (HRMA) for multichannel packet radio networks
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A new multichannel MAC protocol called hop reservation multiple access (HRMA) for packet-radio networks is introduced, specified and analyzed. HRMA is based on very-slow frequency-hopping spread spectrum (FHSS) and takes advantage of the time slotting necessary for frequency hopping. HRMA allows a pair of communicating nodes to reserve a frequency hop (channel) using a hop reservation and handshake mechanism on every hop to guarantee collision-free data transmission in the presence of hidden terminals. HRMA provides a baseline to offer QoS in ad-hoc networks based on simple half-duplex slow FHSS radios. We analyze the throughput achieved in HRMA for the case of a fully-connected network assuming variable-length packets, and compare it against an ideal multichannel access protocol and the multichannel slotted ALOHA protocol. The numerical results show that HRMA can achieve much higher throughput than multichannel slotted ALOHA in the traffic-load ranges of interest especially when the average packet length is large compared to a slot size, in which case the maximum throughput of HRMA is close to what can be obtained with an ideal protocol.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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.
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".