MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4293863367 · doi:10.1109/siu55565.2022.9864805

Packet Loss Rate Prediction for Vehicular Networks with Regression Methods

2022· article· en· W4293863367 on OpenAlexaff
Osman Nuri Koc, Engin Maşazade

Bibliographic record

Venue2022 30th Signal Processing and Communications Applications Conference (SIU) · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicVehicular Ad Hoc Networks (VANETs)
Canadian institutionsStantec (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceRegression analysisNetwork packetRegressionPacket lossTransmission (telecommunications)Reliability (semiconductor)HeuristicLinear regressionWireless ad hoc networkSet (abstract data type)Data setPolynomial regressionMachine learningArtificial intelligenceStatisticsWirelessPower (physics)Computer networkTelecommunications

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Vehicle communication aims to improve the reliability, security and latency performance of vehicle ad hoc network communication. In this study, an heuristic function that calculates the packet loss rate (PLR) in the vehicle network using regression methods is proposed, given different vehicle density, transmission speed, and transmission power values. In order to measure the performance of the regression methods, the transmissions of the connected vehicles under realistic traffic scenarios were obtained by simulations. Simulations are made for different urban and highway conditions by working together with Omnet++, Sumo and Veins environments. The results obtained from these simulations are translated into the PLR dataset. The data set is used as training and test data in various regression algorithms. Numerical results show that Catboost regression method gives the least error between predicted and actual results compared to other regression methods. Thanks to the heuristic we have obtained, given a set of transmission parameters, the PLR can be determined directly. In this way, the system designer chooses among the solutions that provide the given PLR according to the needs, or it becomes possible to reduce the PLR below the target level by re-adjusting the transmission parameters.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
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 score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.020

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.280
Teacher spread0.258 · 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

Citations1
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venue2022 30th Signal Processing and Communications Applications Conference (SIU)Same topicVehicular Ad Hoc Networks (VANETs)French-language works237,207