Multi-hop Wireless Network: A Comparative Study for Routing Protocols Using OMNET++ Simulator
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
The growth of ad hoc networks which occurred in the last few years results in an improvement in routing protocols to handle multi-hop communications. The multi-hop communication is the most suitable solution to overcome the limitation of transmission range of mobile terminals. The selection of routing protocol among the existing ones is a crucial issue, and based on its performance. Thus, in this work the performance of four well-known routing protocols named DSR, AODV, OLSR and DSDV was evaluated based on ad hoc network size (number of nodes). In this work, we have achieved several simulation scenarios to estimate the performance of the mentioned protocols. Results have been achieved by using OMNet++ simulator and we have considered three metrics which are: end-to-end delay, collision and packet delivery ratio for comparison purpose. This metrics are compared based on the number of nodes which have directly affected the number of hops.
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 | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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