MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2493307690 · doi:10.1109/tvt.2015.2457680

Toward a Comprehensive Model for Performance Analysis of Opportunistic Routing in Wireless Mesh Networks

2015· article· en· W2493307690 on OpenAlexafffund
Amir Darehshoorzadeh, Robson E. De Grande, Azzedine Boukerche

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Vehicular Technology · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicCooperative Communication and Network Coding
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsComputer networkComputer scienceNetwork packetWireless mesh networkDistributed computingRouting protocolRouting (electronic design automation)Reliability (semiconductor)ForwarderWireless networkWirelessSource routingDynamic Source RoutingTelecommunications

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Opportunistic routing (OR) is a promising paradigm that has been proposed for wireless mesh networks. This routing paradigm takes advantage of the broadcast nature of the wireless medium to increase the reliability of transmissions in multihop wireless networks. The selection of a set of candidates involves satisfying the basic requirements of the model, in which packets are forwarded toward the destination. In OR, if one of the selected candidates does not receive the packet, another candidate might be able to continue forwarding the packet. The decision of which forwarder to choose is made by coordination between candidates that have successfully received the transmitted packet. In this paper, we propose a discrete-time Markov chain as a general model for OR and demonstrate how it can be used to evaluate the performance of OR protocols. We also review three well-known OR protocols that we have selected as a study case. Our study demonstrates how our model facilitates better understanding of the combination of a number of candidates and retransmissions and their significant contributions to the successful delivery of data packets. Thus, this shows that our model can help in the design of future OR protocols and efficient candidate selection algorithms.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
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 score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
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 head0.092
GPT teacher head0.294
Teacher spread0.202 · 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

Citations28
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Vehicular TechnologySame topicCooperative Communication and Network CodingFrench-language works237,207