MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Simple ARQ Protocol for Reliable Transport in LowPANs

2024· article· en· W4408325748 on OpenAlexaff
Mohamed Kouni Chahed, Aref Meddeb, Amine Boufaied

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicNetwork Time Synchronization Technologies
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Sherbrooke
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSimple (philosophy)Computer scienceProtocol (science)Selective Repeat ARQComputer networkHybrid automatic repeat requestAutomatic repeat requestMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Due to the surge in IoT devices, numerous protocols have been proposed to meet their needs. UDP is commonly used for IoT because of its simplicity, low latency, minimal overhead, and low energy consumption. In contrast, TCP is less suitable for IoT due to its higher resource demands, complexity, and greater energy consumption, which are challenging for small devices with limited resources. Therefore, often, reliability is provided by upper-layer protocols, mainly by the applications themselves. In fact, classical IoT applications such as sensing, identification and actuating generate multiple copies of data due to the hardware redundancy and periodic updates. Examples of such applications include, agricultural, environmental, traffic, and healthcare monitoring. UDP and TCP protocols may be inadequate for IoT applications requiring reliable, real-time communication. In critical situations like battlefields or disasters, sensors might only send a few messages before being destroyed. Therefore, the network itself must ensure reliability in these scenarios. Moreover, smart textiles are more and more integrating sensory devices and require reliable transmissions. In fact, with the very stringent resource constraints on one hand, and the requirements to respect the Specific Absorption Rate (SAR) of human bodies, on the other hand, re-transmissions and power must be kept at their lowest levels. In this paper, we propose a simple Automatic Request (SARQ) transport protocol that uses acknowledgments and a retransmission mechanism. Through a realistic simulation setup using Contiki motes in cooja simulator, we show that our protocol exhibits slightly higher energy consumption and resource requirements than UDP, but far less than TCP. Conversely, we show that our protocol exhibits 99% Packet Delivery Ratio (PDR), while UDP and TCP exhibit 74% and 99% PDR, respectively.

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)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.295
Teacher spread0.276 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations2
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicNetwork Time Synchronization TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207