MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2161924339 · doi:10.1109/csa.2009.5404301

Multiratecast in Wireless Fault Tolerant Sensor and Actuator Networks

2009· article· en· W2161924339 on OpenAlexaff
Xuehong Liu, Arnaud Casteigts, Nishith Goel, Amiya Nayak, Ivan Stojmenović

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicEnergy Efficient Wireless Sensor Networks
Canadian institutionsCistel Technology (Canada)University of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMulticastComputer scienceComputer networkWirelessRouting (electronic design automation)Metric (unit)ActuatorWireless sensor networkDistributed computingThroughputEngineeringTelecommunications

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract—We study the multicast problem in wireless sensor networks, where the source can send data to a fixed number of destinations (actuators) at a different rate (multiratecast). A typical motivation of such communication scheme is to enable fault tolerant monitoring applications where data is reported to more than one actuators using different rates that decrease with the sensors distance, so that if the closest actuator fails, others can take over from it. We propose two multiratecast routing protocols: Maximum Rate Multicast (MRM) and Optimal Rate Cost Multicast (ORCM), which are the first localized positionbased protocols specifically designed for this problem. The first, MRM, selects the next forwarding neighbor(s) in order to favor destinations requiring the highest rates, while the second, ORCM, evaluates several possible choices and select the best according to a cost over progress ratio criterion. The two protocols are compared by simulation, using a new metric that takes the rate into account when computing a multicast cost. Results show that ORCM provides a better routing performance in case of a small number of destinations, while MRM performs better for large numbers of destinations and has a lower computational cost. MRM also behaves better than ORCM when the variance among the rates becomes important. I.

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 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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.383
Threshold uncertainty score0.846

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.215
Teacher spread0.208 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations2
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicEnergy Efficient Wireless Sensor NetworksFrench-language works237,207