Performance and energy consumption analysis of 802.11 with FEC codes over wireless sensor networks
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper expands an analytical performance model of 802.11 to accurately estimate throughput and energy demand of 802.11-based wireless sensor network (WSN) when sensor nodes employ Reed-Solomon (RS) codes, one of block forward error correction (FEC) techniques. This model evaluates these two metrics as a function of the channel bit error rate (BER) and the RS symbol size. Since the basic recovery unit of RS codes is a symbol not a bit, the symbol size affects the WSN performance even if each packet carries the same amount of FEC check bits. The larger size is more effective to recover long-lasting error bursts although it increases the computational complexity of encoding and decoding RS codes. For applying the extended model to WSNs, this paper collects traffic traces from a WSN consisting of two TIP50CM sensor nodes and measures its energy consumption for processing RS codes. Based on traces, it approximates WSN channels with Gilbert models. The computational analyses confirm that the adoption of RS codes in 802.11 significantly improves its throughput and energy efficiency of WSNs with a high BER. They also predict that the choice of an appropriate RS symbol size causes a lot of difference in throughput and power waste over short-term durations while the symbol size rarely affects the long-term average of these 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 | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".