MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2328058829 · doi:10.1109/jcn.2016.000013

Impact of trust-based security association and mobility on the delay metric in MANET

2016· article· en· W2328058829 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Communications and Networks · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicMobile Ad Hoc Networks
Canadian institutionsInnovation, Science and Economic Development Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceMetric (unit)Mobile ad hoc networkComputer networkComputer securityAssociation (psychology)TelecommunicationsBusinessNetwork packet

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Trust models in the literature of MANETs commonly assume that packets have different security requirements. Before a node forwards a packet, if the recipient's trust level does not meet the packet's requirement level, then the recipient must perform certain security association procedures, such as re-authentication. We present in this paper an analysis of the epidemic broadcast delay in such context. The network, mobility and trust models presented in this paper are quite generic and allow us to obtain the delay component induced only by the security associations along a path. Numerical results obtained by simulations also confirm the accuracy of the analysis. In particular, we can observe from both simulation's and analysis results that, for large and sparsely connected networks, the delay caused by security associations is very small compared to the total delay of a packet. This also means that parameters like network density and nodes' velocity, rather than any trust model parameter, have more impact on the overall delay.

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.

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)0.002
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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.566
Threshold uncertainty score0.168

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
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 science0.0010.000
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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.276
Teacher spread0.260 · 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