MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2280720320 · doi:10.1109/vtcfall.2015.7390909

Effects of Correlated Shadowing Modeling on Performance Evaluation of Wireless Sensor Networks

2015· article· en· W2280720320 on OpenAlexaff
Shani Lu, John H R May, Russell Haines

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicMobile Ad Hoc Networks
Canadian institutionsCommunications Research Centre Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWireless sensor networkComputer scienceShadow mappingWirelessComputer networkTelecommunicationsArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Wireless links are typically modeled in isolation as independent and parallel links. However, in reality, there is often a correlation in defects and impairments between collocated links. The spatial correlation of shadowing among proximate wireless links has been frequently observed. Although different types of correlated shadowing models have been proposed for wireless channels, these models are not present in popular network simulators. Ignoring such correlations results in the diversity of adjacent links being over- estimated. Our hypothesis is that this could lead to incorrect results when evaluating the performance of wireless systems and network protocols. In this paper, the ns-3 simulation environment has been enhanced with a prototype correlated shadowing model developed in our previously published work. We study the end-to-end packet delivery ratio and delay in wireless sensor networks using both correlated and independent propagation models. Simulation results show that correlated and independent shadowing models produce significant differences in network performance. Moreover, we compare the complexity of different modeling options. It is shown that this correlated propagation model in ns-3 can improve simulation realism without inducing any considerable degradation of scalability.

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)0.001
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 score0.489
Threshold uncertainty score0.439

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.256
Teacher spread0.224 · 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

Citations23
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicMobile Ad Hoc NetworksFrench-language works237,207