MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

On the Impact of the RPL Decreased Rank Attack on 6TiSCH Networks

2024· article· en· W4399119595 on OpenAlexafffund
Mohammed Mahyoub, Sazzad Hossain, Ashraf Matrawy

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicIoT and Edge/Fog Computing
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsIPv6Computer networkRouting protocolNetwork packetComputer scienceNetwork topologyTopology (electrical circuits)Node (physics)Protocol stackEnd-to-end delayMesh networkingRouting (electronic design automation)Wireless sensor networkThe InternetWirelessMathematicsEngineeringTelecommunications

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The 6TiSCH protocol stack was designed to provide a reliable and time-bound multi-hop routing solution for the Industrial Internet of Things (1IoT), integrating the IPv6 Routing Protocol for Low Power and Lossy Networks (RPL) and Time-Slotted Channel Hopping (TSCH) protocols seamlessly. However, deviations from standard procedures by malicious nodes can severely affect network formation and operations, resulting in degraded performance. This study investigates the impact of the decreased rank attack (DRA) on RPL within the 6TiSCH network, examining its effects on network operations and per-formance. Experimental evaluation reveals that DRA can lead to an average delay of 21.4% in network formation and run-time disruptions, thereby affecting the 6TiSCH synchronization process. Consequently, node departures from the network and subsequent rejoining to maintain the topology increase by an average of 60.71 %. To deal with this disruption, the nodes need to send more keep-alive and RPL messages, resulting in an average increase of 69.70% and 20.08%, respectively, leading to a 49.9% increase in energy depletion. Furthermore, the D RA reduces the packet delivery ratio and increases the average end-to-end packet delay by averages of 5.13% and 20%, respectively. However, it is important to note that the impact of the attack can vary significantly depending on the specific configurations and setups used, such as network topology, network size, attacker position, neighboring density, and RPL/TSCH parameter settings.

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)0.008
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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.297
Teacher spread0.267 · 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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicIoT and Edge/Fog ComputingFrench-language works237,207