Receiver-Assisted Congestion Control to Achieve High Throughput in Lossy Wireless Networks
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Many applications would require fast data transfer in high-speed wireless networks nowadays. However, due to its conservative congestion control algorithm, Transmission Control Protocol (TCP) cannot effectively utilize the network capacity in lossy wireless networks. In this paper, we propose a receiver-assisted congestion control mechanism (RACC) in which the sender performs loss-based control, while the receiver is performing delay-based control. The receiver measures the network bandwidth based on the packet interarrival interval and uses it to compute a congestion window size deemed appropriate for the sender. After receiving the advertised value feedback from the receiver, the sender then uses the additive increase and multiplicative decrease (AIMD) mechanism to compute the correct congestion window size to be used. By integrating the loss-based and the delay-based congestion controls, our mechanism can mitigate the effect of wireless losses, alleviate the timeout effect, and therefore make better use of network bandwidth. Simulation and experiment results in various scenarios show that our mechanism can outperform conventional TCP in high-speed and lossy wireless environments.
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 | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| 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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
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".