MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2281800984 · doi:10.1109/vtcfall.2015.7390830

Adaptive Expiration Time for Dynamic Beacon Scheduling in Vehicular Ad-Hoc Networks

2015· article· en· W2281800984 on OpenAlexaff
Maryam Alotaibi, Hussein T. Mouftah

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicVehicular Ad Hoc Networks (VANETs)
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBeaconComputer scienceReal-time computingScheduling (production processes)ScalabilityWireless ad hoc networkComputer networkInterval (graph theory)Vehicular ad hoc networkWirelessTelecommunicationsEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In Vehicle Ad-hoc Networks, beacon is generated periodically to provide adequate awareness of the surrounding vehicles and environment. Generating periodic beacons at the same rates for all vehicles, typically high rates for safety applications, consume sizeable resources on communication channel. This is in turn presents a challenge to a reliable and successful delivery. This problem gains a lot of attention and researchers started to come up with many fundamentally different solutions to adjust beacons rate for better scalability. However, adjusting beacon rate without a good estimate of beacon data lifetime may impact the accuracy of the awareness of the surrounding vehicles. Particularly, for the applications and protocols that require knowledge about network topology. Accordingly, we propose a new mathematical formula, Adaptive Expiry Time (AET), to determine the lifetime of beacon data. It is independent of beacon scheduling interval and based on neighbour position, speed and orientation. It has been evaluated using proposed Dynamic Beacon Scheduling (DBS) that adjusts beacon interval according vehicle speed. Furthermore, it has been compared to different approaches of expiry time, such as Constant Expiry Time (CET), Variable Expiry Time (VET).

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.013
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.013
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.221
Teacher spread0.207 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations5
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicVehicular Ad Hoc Networks (VANETs)French-language works237,207