A Novel Centrality Metric for Topology Control in Underwater Sensor Networks
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In underwater sensor networks, the design of energy efficient and reliable data collection protocols is a daunting challenge. In this context, topology control and opportunistic routing are promising techniques for improving reliability and conserve energy. However, due to the challenges of the underwater acoustic channel, the vast knowledge acquired and the solution proposed so far in the context of terrestrial wireless ad hoc sensor networks cannot be applied directly to underwater acoustic sensor networks. In this work, we shed light on network topology modeling from a routing viewpoint. We model the probabilistic multipath routing behavior driven by opportunistic routing protocols in underwater sensor networks. Afterward, we propose the PCen centrality metric to measure the importance of underwater sensor nodes to the data delivery task through opportunistic routing protocols. PCen is aimed to identify critical nodes that can be used to guide topology control solutions. Our simulation results consider different network densities and reveal the presence of a few number of nodes with high PCen centrality value that will have a high rate of carried traffic, being critical for the network performance.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it