MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2739965243 · doi:10.1109/access.2017.2733380

Performance Improvement of Cluster-Based Routing Protocol in VANET

2017· article· en· W2739965243 on OpenAlexaff
Ahmad Abuashour, Michel Kadoch

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Access · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicVehicular Ad Hoc Networks (VANETs)
Canadian institutionsÉcole de Technologie Supérieure
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceComputer networkRouting protocolThroughputVehicular ad hoc networkOverhead (engineering)Wireless ad hoc networkNetwork topologyDistributed computingRouting (electronic design automation)Wireless

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Vehicular ad-hoc NETworks (VANETs) have received considerable attention in recent years, due to its unique characteristics, which are different from mobile ad-hoc NETworks, such as rapid topology change, frequent link failure, and high vehicle mobility. The main drawback of VANETs network is the network instability, which yields to reduce the network efficiency. In this paper, we propose three algorithms: cluster-based life-time routing (CBLTR) protocol, Intersection dynamic VANET routing (IDVR) protocol, and control overhead reduction algorithm (CORA). The CBLTR protocol aims to increase the route stability and average throughput in a bidirectional segment scenario. The cluster heads (CHs) are selected based on maximum lifetime among all vehicles that are located within each cluster. The IDVR protocol aims to increase the route stability and average throughput, and to reduce end-to-end delay in a grid topology. The elected intersection CH receives a set of candidate shortest routes (SCSR) closed to the desired destination from the software defined network. The IDVR protocol selects the optimal route based on its current location, destination location, and the maximum of the minimum average throughput of SCSR. Finally, the CORA algorithm aims to reduce the control overhead messages in the clusters by developing a new mechanism to calculate the optimal numbers of the control overhead messages between the cluster members and the CH. We used SUMO traffic generator simulators and MATLAB to evaluate the performance of our proposed protocols. These protocols significantly outperform many protocols mentioned in the literature, in terms of many parameters.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.294
Teacher spread0.273 · 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

Citations132
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE AccessSame topicVehicular Ad Hoc Networks (VANETs)French-language works237,207