Cluster-based Cooperative Data Forwarding with Multi-radio Multi-channel for Multi-flow Wireless 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
Cooperative forwarding has shown a substantial network performance improvement compared to traditional routing in multi-hop wireless network. To further enhance the system throughput, especially in the presence of highly congested multiple cross traffic flows, a promising way is to incorporate the multi-radio multi-channel (MRMC) capability into cooperative forwarding. However, it requires to jointly address multiple issues. These include radio-channel assignment, routing metric computation, candidate relay set selection, candidate relay prioritization, data broadcasting over multi-radio multi-channel, and best relay selection using a coordination scheme. In this paper, we propose a simple and efficient cluster-based cooperative data forwarding (CCDF) which jointly addresses all these issues. We study the performance impact when the same candidate relay set is being used for multiple cross traffic flows in the network. The network simulation shows that the CCDF with MRMC not only retains the advantage of receiver diversity in cooperative forwarding but also minimizes the interference, which therefore further enhances the system throughput for the network with multiple cross traffic flows.
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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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