Lightweight Retransmission for Random Access in Satellite Networks
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Existing random access protocols designed for satellite networks have poor performance in short burst communications because of the difficulty on global time synchronization and frequent collisions. In this paper, we propose a Lightweight Retransmission (LwR) mechanism for random access in satellite networks to reduce collisions and get rid of synchronization requirement. In our LwR, only partial bits in a packet are retransmitted. Firstly, we formulate the lightweight retransmission problem and prove that it is NP-hard. Next, we focus on the construction of partial replicas, which is the core of our LwR, and propose regular and random construction methods. Especially, we prove the sufficient conditions for successfully decoding two conflicted packets by ZigZag. Finally, we propose an algebraic model and derive the upper and lower bounds of successfully decoding probability under different construction methods. Both theoretical analysis and experimental results reveal that the random construction method achieves higher decoding probability than the regular construction method. Simulation results also demonstrate that our LwR significantly outperforms related schemes designed for satellite networks.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".