The Capacity of Ad hoc Networks under Random Packet Losses
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We consider the problem of determining asymptotic bounds on the capacity of a random ad hoc network. Previous approaches assumed a link layer model in which if a transmitter-receiver pair can communicate with each other, i.e., the Signal to Interference and Noise Ratio (SINR) is above a certain threshold, then every transmitted packet is received error-free by the receiver thereby. Using this model, the per node capacity of the network was shown to be $Θ(\frac{1}{\sqrt{n\log{n}}})$. In reality, for any finite link SINR, there is a non-zero probability of erroneous reception of the packet. We show that in a large network, as the packet travels an asymptotically large number of hops from source to destination, the cumulative impact of packet losses over intermediate links results in a per-node throughput of only $O(\frac{1}{n})$. We then propose a new scheduling scheme to counter this effect. The proposed scheme provides tight guarantees on end-to-end packet loss probability, and improves the per-node throughput to $Ω(\frac{1}{\sqrt{n} ({\log{n}})^{\frac{α{+2}}{2(α-2)}}})$ where $α>2$ is the path loss exponent.
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 | 0.004 | 0.034 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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".