MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4236238515 · doi:10.1002/wcm.384

Voronoi diagram and convex hull based geocasting and routing in wireless networks

2006· article· en· W4236238515 on OpenAlexafffund
Ivan Stojmenović, Anand Prakash Ruhil, D. K. Lobiyal

Bibliographic record

VenueWireless Communications and Mobile Computing · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicMobile Ad Hoc Networks
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaConsejo Nacional de Ciencia y Tecnología
KeywordsVoronoi diagramRectangleConvex hullComputer scienceGeographic routingGreedy algorithmRouting (electronic design automation)Destination-Sequenced Distance Vector routingAlgorithmMathematical optimizationStatic routingRegular polygonDynamic Source RoutingMathematicsRouting protocolComputer networkGeometry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract In this paper, we propose a general algorithm (based on an unified framework for both routing and geocasting problems), in which message is forwarded to exactly those neighbors which may be best choices for a possible position of destination (using the appropriate criterion). We then propose and discuss new VD‐GREEDY and CH‐MFR methods and define R‐DIR, modified version of existing directional methods. In VD‐GREEDY method, these neighbors are determined by intersecting the Voronoi diagram of neighbors with the circle (or rectangle) of possible positions of destination, while the portion of the convex hull of neighboring nodes is analogously used in the CH‐MFR method. Routing and geocasting algorithms differ only inside the circle/rectangle. The proposed methods may be also used for the destination search phase allowing the application of different routing schemes after the exact position of destination is discovered. VD‐GREEDY and CH‐MFR algorithms are loop free, and have smaller flooding rate (with similar success rate) compared to directional method. We proposed to use dominating set concept to reduce flooding ratio significantly, with a marginal impact on success rate and hop count. Simulations, involving the proposed and some known algorithms, are performed for two basic scenarios, one for geocasting and reactive routing, and the other for proactive routing, and both showed that our methods have higher success rate and lower flooding rate compared to existing methods. Copyright © 2006 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.236
Teacher spread0.225 · 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

Citations66
Published2006
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueWireless Communications and Mobile ComputingSame topicMobile Ad Hoc NetworksFrench-language works237,207