MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2164609872 · doi:10.1109/iwwan.2004.1525544

Controlled flooding in wireless ad-hoc networks

2006· article· en· W2164609872 on OpenAlex

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 Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer networkFlooding (psychology)Computer scienceWireless ad hoc networkOptimized Link State Routing ProtocolAd hoc wireless distribution serviceDistributed computingRouting protocolMobile ad hoc networkWireless Routing ProtocolWirelessRouting (electronic design automation)TelecommunicationsNetwork packet

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We show how flooding can be adopted as a reliable and efficient routing scheme in ad-hoc wireless mobile networks. It turns out that, with the assistance of some tunable heuristics, flooding is not necessarily inferior to sophisticated point-to-point forwarding schemes, at least for some classes of wireless applications. We discuss a reactive broadcast-based ad-hoc routing protocol in which flooding exhibits a tendency to converge to a narrow strip of nodes along the shortest path between source and destination. The width of this strip can be adjusted automatically or by the user, e.g., in response to varying node density and mobility patterns. Finally, we point out a certain deficiency inherent in the IEEE 802.11 family of collision avoidance schemes and show how to fix it to provide better service to broadcast-based routing schemes represented by our variant of controlled flooding.

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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.938
Threshold uncertainty score0.577

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 science0.0010.000
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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.208
Teacher spread0.202 · 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

Citations63
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicMobile Ad Hoc NetworksFrench-language works237,207