Rate Adaptation in Delay-Sensitive and Energy-Constrained Large-Scale IoT Networks
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Feedback transmissions are used to acknowledge correct packet reception, trigger erroneous packet re-transmissions, and adapt transmission parameters (e.g., rate and power). Despite the feedback paramount role in establishing reliable communication links, the majority of the literature overlooks its impact by assuming genie-aided systems with flawless and instantaneous feedback. However, this idealistic assumption is no longer valid for large-scale Internet of Things (IoT) networks, characterized by energy-constrained devices, susceptible to interference, and serving delay-sensitive applications. Furthermore, feedback-free operation is necessitated for IoT receivers with stringent energy constraints. In this context, this paper explicitly accounts for the impact of feedback in energy-constrained delay-sensitive large-scale IoT networks. We consider a time-slotted system with closed-loop and open-loop rate adaptation schemes, where packets are fragmented to operate at a reliable transmission rate satisfying packet delivery deadlines. In the closed-loop scheme, the delivery of each fragment is acknowledged through an error-prone feedback channel. The open-loop scheme has no feedback mechanism, and hence, a predetermined fragment repetition strategy is employed to improve transmission reliability. Using stochastic geometry and queueing theory, we develop a novel spatiotemporal framework for both schemes to quantify the impact of feedback on network performance in terms of transmission reliability, latency, and energy consumption.
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 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".