MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3009032439 · doi:10.1002/dac.4364

Message trust‐based secure multipath routing protocol for opportunistic networks

2020· article· en· W3009032439 on OpenAlexaff
Sanjay Kumar Dhurandher, Jagdeep Singh, Isaac Woungang, Raghav Kumar, Geetanshu Gupta

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Communication Systems · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicOpportunistic and Delay-Tolerant Networks
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceComputer networkCommunication sourceEncryptionLatency (audio)Routing protocolMultipath propagationRouting (electronic design automation)Multipath routingDisjoint setsWireless Routing ProtocolTelecommunicationsChannel (broadcasting)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Summary Opportunistic networks (OppNets) are composed of wireless nodes opportunistically communicating with each other. These networks are designed to operate in a challenging environment characterized by high delay, intermittent connectivity, and no guarantee of fixed path between the sender and the destination nodes. One of the most vital issues in designing and maintaining practical networks over a time period is the security of the messages flowing in OppNets. This paper proposes a new method called message trust‐based secure multipath routing protocol (MT‐SMRP) for opportunistic networks. Various routing protocols such as ProPHet, Epidemic, and HiBOp, to name a few, have been proposed for OppNets, but none of these have applied a secure multipath routing technique. The proposed MT‐SMRP scheme relays the message to the destination through the disjoint paths, each applying a soft‐encryption technique to prevent message fabrication attacks. Simulations are conducted using the Haggle Infocom'06 real mobility data traces, showing that when time‐to‐live is varied, (1) the proposed MT‐SMRP scheme outperforms D‐MUST by 18.10%, 7.55%, 3.275%, respectively, in terms of delivery probability, messages dropped, and average latency; (2) it also outperforms SHBPR by 21.30%, 7.44%, and 4.85%, respectively, in terms of delivery probability, messages dropped, and average latency. Under similar performance metrics, the performance of MT‐SMRP is also shown to be better than that of D‐MUST and SHBPR when the buffer size (respondents. the message generation interval) is varied.

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)0.003
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.083
GPT teacher head0.340
Teacher spread0.257 · 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

Citations18
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Communication SystemsSame topicOpportunistic and Delay-Tolerant NetworksFrench-language works237,207