An Efficient Data-Gathering Routing Protocol for Underwater Wireless Sensor Networks
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Most applications of underwater wireless sensor networks (UWSNs) demand reliable data delivery over a longer period in an efficient and timely manner. However, the harsh and unpredictable underwater environment makes routing more challenging as compared to terrestrial WSNs. Most of the existing schemes deploy mobile sensors or a mobile sink (MS) to maximize data gathering. However, the relatively high deployment cost prevents their usage in most applications. Thus, this paper presents an autonomous underwater vehicle (AUV)-aided efficient data-gathering (AEDG) routing protocol for reliable data delivery in UWSNs. To prolong the network lifetime, AEDG employs an AUV for data collection from gateways and uses a shortest path tree (SPT) algorithm while associating sensor nodes with the gateways. The AEDG protocol also limits the number of associated nodes with the gateway nodes to minimize the network energy consumption and to prevent the gateways from overloading. Moreover, gateways are rotated with the passage of time to balance the energy consumption of the network. To prevent data loss, AEDG allows dynamic data collection at the AUV depending on the limited number of member nodes that are associated with each gateway. We also develop a sub-optimal elliptical trajectory of AUV by using a connected dominating set (CDS) to further facilitate network throughput maximization. The performance of the AEDG is validated via simulations, which demonstrate the effectiveness of AEDG in comparison to two existing UWSN routing protocols in terms of the selected performance metrics.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".