Bounding Interference in Wireless Ad Hoc Networks With Nodes in Random Position
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Given a set of positions for wireless nodes, the interference minimization problem is to assign a transmission radius (i.e., a power level) to each node such that the resulting communication graph is connected while minimizing the maximum (respectively, average) interference. We consider the model introduced by von Rickenbach (2005), in which each wireless node is represented by a point in Euclidean space on which is centered a transmission range represented by a ball, and edges in the corresponding graph are symmetric. The problem is NP-complete in two or more dimensions (Buchin 2008), and no polynomial-time approximation algorithm is known. We show how to solve the problem efficiently in settings typical for wireless ad hoc networks. If nodes are represented by a set P of n points selected uniformly and independently at random over a d-dimensional rectangular region, then the topology given by the closure of the Euclidean minimum spanning tree of P has O(log n) maximum interference with high probability and O(1) expected interference. We extend the first bound to a general class of communication graphs over a broad set of probability distributions. We present a local algorithm that constructs a graph from this class; this is the first local algorithm to provide an upper bound on expected maximum interference. Finally, we disprove a conjecture of Devroye and Morin (2012) relating the maximum interference of the Euclidean minimum spanning tree to the optimal maximum interference attainable.
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 | 0.005 | 0.032 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".