TSOR: Thompson Sampling-Based Opportunistic Routing
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Routing is a fundamental problem and has been extensively studied in various networks. However, in highly dynamic networks (e.g., wireless ad hoc networks), nodes have limited transmission opportunities due to high mobility, noise and interference, where traditional routing is often not the best approach.Opportunistic routing (OR), on the other hand, can effectively minimize the routing cost (e.g., the number of hops) and improve the success of routing by utilizing link metrics. However, the link metrics are usually unknown in advance and changing. In this paper, we design an adaptive algorithm calledThompson sampling-based opportunistic routing (TSOR)motivated by the distributed Bellman-Ford algorithms. TSOR is able to learn the link metrics and route packets simultaneously to reduce the overall cost. Theoretically, we show a lower bound and an upper bound of the cumulative regret (i.e., performance gap) between TSOR and the optimal routing algorithm that knows all link metrics in advance. The regret increases sublinearly with respect to the number of packets, and has a lower order in terms of the network size than the best-known results. Furthermore, we compare TSOR with the state-of-the-art algorithms, and the evaluation results show that TSOR has a lower regret and a faster convergence rate to the optimal policy than the state-of-the-art algorithms.
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 | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".