MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4411948496 · doi:10.1109/comst.2025.3585091

A Survey on LoRaWAN MAC Schemes: From Conventional Solutions to AI-Driven Protocols

2025· article· en· W4411948496 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Communications Surveys & Tutorials · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicIoT Networks and Protocols
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsProtocol (science)Computer scienceComputer networkMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Long Range (LoRa) networks have emerged as a vital solution catering to applications requiring coverage over relatively long distances in the world of Internet of Things (IoT), where connectivity and efficient data transmission are paramount. LoRa’s utilization of the unlicensed Industrial, Scientific, and Medical (ISM) band not only underscores its cost-effectiveness but also positions it favorably against licensed technologies in terms of deployment cost. Consequently, LoRa has been used as the underlying communication technology for applications across various industrial IoT scenarios. Despite its immense promise in reshaping IoT connectivity, LoRa does have some shortcomings and challenges that the research community has yet to address to unleash its full potential. These limitations have triggered substantial attention from diverse entities, including research institutions, organizations, and industry stakeholders. This paper reviews the literature aimed at improving the capacity and scalability of LoRa networks specifically at the Medium Access Control (MAC) and data link layers. Unlike other surveys, this study focuses on these layers because they play a pivotal role in managing collision rates, which significantly impact network scalability. The paper suggests a comprehensive review of the literature, organizing it based on key limitations that could hinder the network’s ability to meet its performance objectives, including scalability, Packet Delivery Ratio (PDR), and energy efficiency. In addition, the paper provides a summary of these research efforts and offers insight into potential directions for future research in this area.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.778
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0020.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.093
GPT teacher head0.366
Teacher spread0.272 · 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