Bibliographic record
Abstract
Mobile ad hoc networks (MANETs) are generating much interest both in academia and the telecommunication industries. The principal attractions of MANETs are related to the ease with which they can be deployed due to their infrastructure-less and decentralized nature. For example, unlike other wireless networks, MANETs do not require centralized infrastructures such as base stations, and they are arguably more robust due to their avoidance of single point of failures. Interestingly, the attributes that make MANETs attractive as a network paradigm are the same phenomena that compound the challenge of designing adequate security schemes for these innovative networks. One of the challenging security problems is the issue of certificate revocation in MANETs where there are no on-line access to trusted authorities. In wired network environments, when certificates are to be revoked, certificate authorities (CAs) add the information regarding the certificates in question to certificate revocation lists (CRLs) and post the CRLs on accessible repositories or distribute them to relevant entities. In purely ad hoc networks, there are typically no access to centralized repositories or trusted authorities; therefore the conventional method of certificate revocation is not applicable. Another challenging MANET security problem is the issue of secure routing in the presence of selfish or adversarial entities which selectively drop packets they agreed to forward; and in so doing these selfish or adversarial entities can disrupt the network traffic and cause various communication problems. In this thesis, we present two security protocols we developed for addressing the above-mentioned MANET security needs. The first protocol is a decentralized certificate revocation scheme which allows the nodes within a MANET to have full control over the process of certificate revocation. The scheme is fully contained and it does not rely on any input from centralized or external entities such as trusted CAs. The second protocol is a secure MANET routing scheme we named Robust Source Routing (RSR). In addition to providing data origin authentication services and integrity checks, RSR is able to mitigate against intelligent, colluding malicious agents which selectively drop or modify packets they are required to forward.
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 | 0.004 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.008 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.009 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.013 | 0.011 |
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".