Cooperation-Based Routing Protocol for Mobile Ad-Hoc Network
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This chapter describes a hybrid routing protocol for mobile ad hoc network based on the packet relaying cooperation and zone-based network architecture. In each zone, a specific node called Principal manages the routing processing. The Principal receives, periodically from its zone‘s nodes, two values that express their rate of success and their rate of cooperation, and then calculates the average rate of success, and the average rate of cooperation of the zone. After what, it retransmits these averages to all nodes. The nodes use the two averages values to define the action to be undertaken, cooperate or not. The Principal, knowing the topology of its zone, receives route requests and calculates the path between the source and the destination according to the best way based on cooperation. The Principal‘s features are so that it is simple to realize. It does not impose constraints and it allows the information gathering that is necessary for the model solution. Such the routing protocol and the nodes (to undertake the actions that make them possible to cooperate) use this information. Simulations show the efficiency of the protocol opposite to the pro-active and reactive protocols in the context of cooperation in mobile ad hoc networks.Request access from your librarian to read this chapter's full text.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.012 | 0.016 |
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".