Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 6 minor 36 references

ML-MaxProp: Bridging Machine Learning and Delay-Tolerant Routing for Resilient Post-Disaster Communication

T0 review · 4 major / 6 minor · reviewed 2026-08-05 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗ Review JSON

Pith's one-line read Embedding an XGBoost classifier into MaxProp's forwarding pipeline yields near-perfect delivery, lower latency, and lower overhead in simulated post-disaster DTNs.

desk verdict Sensible XGBoost+MaxProp idea, but the manuscript contains no actual results—all figures are placeholders and no numbers are reported—so the central performance claim is unverifiable as submitted. read the letter →

arxiv 2508.20077 v2 pith:2G5DEKA5 submitted 2025-08-27 cs.NI

Tao Xiuyuan , Milena Radenkovic This is my paper · ORCID
classification cs.NI
keywords Delay-TolerantNetworksDisastercommunicationMaxPropMachinelearningXGBoostOpportunisticrouting
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

The paper tries to establish that a delay-tolerant routing protocol can be made more reliable in post-disaster settings by replacing MaxProp's static forwarding heuristic with a lightweight XGBoost classifier that predicts, at each contact, whether a relay is worth using. The proposed protocol, ML-MaxProp, is trained offline on labels harvested from baseline MaxProp simulations and evaluated in the ONE simulator with Helsinki mobility. Across node counts, buffer sizes, TTLs, and communication ranges, the authors report delivery probability consistently above 99.8%, while Epidemic routing delivers about 61%, with lower latency and overhead than MaxProp. If true, this would make infrastructure-free mission-critical emergency messaging feasible by adding a cheap, interpretable learning step to an existing protocol.

What carries the argument

The mechanism is an XGBoost binary classifier embedded in MaxProp's forwarding pipeline. At each contact it consumes five contextual features—encounter frequency, hop count, buffer occupancy, message age, and TTL—and outputs a relay-suitability score; MaxProp's queue management still runs, but the handoff decision is gated by the learned model. The model is trained offline on labeled outcomes extracted from MaxProp's own simulation logs, so it is designed to learn which MaxProp-style forwarding opportunities actually lead to successful delivery.

What would settle it

Independently rerun the published parameter sweep (50–150 nodes, 5–20 MB buffers, 300–3600 s TTL, 50–150 m range) for, say, 100 seeds and compare the paired delivery-probability difference between ML-MaxProp and MaxProp. If the 95% confidence interval of that difference contains zero, the headline claim of consistent superiority is falsified.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central discovery is that MaxProp's queueing logic can be augmented—without replacing its store-carry-forward machinery—and still produce large gains. ML-MaxProp uses XGBoost to score each potential relay using contextual features: contact frequency, buffer occupancy, hop count, message age, and TTL. It forwards only when the classifier judges the relay suitable. Training labels come from baseline MaxProp simulations: a message is labeled successful if it eventually reaches its destination under MaxProp. At runtime the learned model gates the forwarding decision, and the authors report that this raises delivery probability above 99.8%, from Epidemic's ~61%, while matching or surpassing M

Load-bearing premise

The classifier is trained on labels produced by baseline MaxProp inside the same simulator used for testing, so the whole claim assumes those training labels represent what actually makes a relay good at runtime rather than merely reproducing MaxProp's own behavior.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Post-disaster DTNs can sustain above-99.8% delivery under constrained buffers, short TTLs, and varied node densities when a learned relay-suitability model is available.
  • Overhead falls sharply under resource constraints, saving bandwidth and energy in exactly the conditions where emergency networks are most stressed.
  • The reported gains are statistically significant across paired t-tests and Wilcoxon tests, so they are not presented as single-run artifacts.
  • TTL and buffer state, rather than raw contact frequency, dominate forwarding decisions, pointing protocol designers toward message-lifetime and storage-aware routing.
  • ML-MaxProp stays interpretable: SVM classification and SHAP/LIME analysis show its decisions align with domain knowledge and remain distinguishable from MaxProp's.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • The closed training/evaluation loop (labels from baseline MaxProp in the same simulator used for testing) leaves open whether the gains persist across different mobility models; a cross-city retraining experiment would test that.
  • The same learned-gate idea could be bolted onto other utility-based DTN protocols such as Prophet or Spray-and-Wait, making the contribution a generic prefilter rather than a MaxProp-specific patch.
  • Because the features are per-contact and cheap to compute, the classifier is a plausible fit for smartphone- or Raspberry-Pi-class emergency nodes; public mobility traces would be the natural next validation.
  • A noise-feature control—shuffling the classifier's inputs while keeping the pipeline intact—would isolate whether the delivered gains come from the contextual features or from the XGBoost infrastructure itself.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

4 major / 6 minor

Summary. The paper proposes ML-MaxProp, a DTN routing protocol that augments MaxProp with an XGBoost classifier to predict relay suitability using features such as encounter frequency, buffer occupancy, hop count, message age, and TTL. The authors report that ML-MaxProp outperforms MaxProp, Spray-and-Wait, and Epidemic in the ONE simulator under the Helsinki SPMBM mobility model, with delivery probability exceeding 99.8%, lower latency, and reduced overhead, validated by paired t-tests and Wilcoxon tests. However, the manuscript contains no figures, no numerical results, no statistical test statistics, and no implementation details that would allow the claims to be checked. The evaluation is also in-sample: the classifier is trained on labels extracted from baseline MaxProp simulations and tested on the same simulator. The central comparative claim is therefore unsupported as written.

Significance. If substantiated, an interpretable, low-cost ML extension of MaxProp could be a useful contribution to opportunistic networking in disaster scenarios. The feature set and the idea of embedding a supervised classifier into a utility-based routing heuristic are reasonable, and the use of ONE with a city-scale mobility model is a standard evaluation context. The paper also attempts to address explainability with SHAP/LIME and to include statistical validation. However, none of the promised evidence is present: all figures are missing, no numerical outputs are reported, and the statistical tests are only mentioned. The paper's core empirical contribution is entirely unverifiable, and the training/evaluation loop raises a circularity concern that is not addressed. As a result, the significance of the claimed results cannot currently be assessed.

major comments (4)
  1. [§6, abstract, §7.1] The central claim—that ML-MaxProp 'consistently surpasses baseline protocols' with delivery probability >99.8%—is unsupported. All eight referenced figures (Figures 1–8) are absent, and no numerical values for delivery ratio, latency, overhead, or hop count appear anywhere. The paired t-test/Wilcoxon results mentioned in §5.4 are never reported (no test statistics, p-values, or effect sizes). Without the empirical data, the paper cannot be evaluated.
  2. [§5.2, §5.4] The evaluation is in-sample: the XGBoost model is trained on labeled outcomes drawn from baseline MaxProp simulations in the ONE simulator, then tested on the same simulator (§5.2: 'Data collected from baseline MaxProp simulations provided labeled outcomes'). This creates a risk that the model simply mimics MaxProp's decisions or overfits to the simulator's dynamics. No independent test data, real-world traces, or ablation analysis are provided to establish that the claimed improvements are genuine rather than artifacts of the training/evaluation loop.
  3. [§6.2 vs. abstract/§7.1] The results are internally inconsistent. §6.2 states that MaxProp 'consistently achieves near-perfect delivery across all node counts' and that Spray-and-Wait achieves 'comparable delivery performance' with minimal relay cost. The abstract and §7.1, however, claim that ML-MaxProp 'significantly outperforms' these baselines, while also conceding it is 'matching or surpassing MaxProp.' If MaxProp already achieves near-perfect delivery, the claimed improvement is marginal or contradictory, and the 'significant outperformance' framing is misleading.
  4. [§5.3, §5.4] No experimental parameters are reported beyond ranges (node count 50–150, buffer 5–20 MB, TTL 300–3600 s, range 50–150 m). The manuscript does not state which specific values were used, how many configurations were tested, what the 'default configuration' was, or how the ten repetitions were aggregated (means? confidence intervals?). This lack of detail makes the evaluation irreproducible. Without concrete parameter settings and per-configuration results, the claim of robustness across diverse conditions cannot be verified.
minor comments (6)
  1. [Figures 1–8] All figure placeholders are empty. The manuscript says 'Figure 1 illustrates...', 'As shown in Fig. 2...', etc., but no images or captions are included. This is unacceptable for a submission.
  2. [References] Many references appear irrelevant to the topic (e.g., [4] on VR body pose estimation, [11] on power transformers, [13] on finger character recognition, [17] on SDN flow tables, [18] on sparse tensor accelerators, [21] on quasi-passive walkers, [29] on analog-to-digital converters). This suggests citation padding and undermines confidence in the scholarship.
  3. [§5.2] The model description is underspecified: no dataset size, class balance, feature values, hyperparameters (max_depth, learning_rate), or train/test split statistics are given. The 80/20 split is mentioned, but there is no report of model accuracy, precision, recall, or validation performance.
  4. [§7.1] The text refers to 'this thesis' repeatedly, but the manuscript is formatted as a research article. This suggests the content was adapted from a thesis without proper editing.
  5. [§6.2, Figure 8 description] Naming is inconsistent: 'ML-MaxProp' is sometimes written 'mlmaxprop' or 'MLMaxProp' (Figure 8 description). Please standardize.
  6. [§7.3] The limitations section acknowledges that the model was 'trained solely on simulation-generated data,' but this is a central methodological weakness that should be acknowledged in §5 and addressed explicitly in the evaluation, not relegated to future work.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No circular reduction found: the ML training/evaluation loop is in-sample, but that is an overfitting/generalization concern, not a definitional or fitted-parameter circularity.

full rationale

The paper's central claim is empirical: an XGBoost classifier, trained on labels from baseline MaxProp simulations (Section 5.2: 'Data collected from baseline MaxProp simulations provided labeled outcomes (successful vs. failed deliveries)'), is embedded in MaxProp and then evaluated on the same ONE simulator. This does not make the claimed superiority true by construction: the classifier could in principle reproduce or worsen MaxProp's behavior, and no equation defines ML-MaxProp's delivery probability in terms of the training labels. There is no fitted parameter whose value is later reported as a 'prediction' of the same quantity. The co-authored references ([15], [16], [30], [34]-[36]) are background or future-work citations; none is used to justify the central performance claim, so there is no load-bearing self-citation chain. Section 7.3 explicitly concedes 'The ML model was trained solely on simulation-generated data' and 'Evaluation was based on classification and simulation metrics, rather than live deployments'; this is an honest external-validity/overfitting limitation, not a circular reduction. The absence of the actual figures and statistical values (Figures 1-8 are placeholders and no p-values/effect sizes are reported) is a severe evidence gap and a correctness risk, but missing data is not equivalent to the derivation reducing to its inputs. Therefore, under the quoted-equivalence standard, no circular step is present.

Assumptions & free parameters 4 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on a hand-picked feature set, unreported XGBoost hyperparameters, and the assumption that MaxProp simulation labels transfer to runtime decisions in the same simulator. All key constants are either unreported or chosen ad hoc.

free parameters (4)
  • XGBoost hyperparameters (e.g., max_depth, learning_rate, n_estimators) = not reported
    Chosen during training on MaxProp simulation data; not stated in the paper, yet they determine model behavior and forwarding decisions.
  • Classification threshold for relay suitability = not reported
    The probability cutoff that turns XGBoost output into a binary forwarding decision is not given.
  • Training data generation settings = not reported
    The labeled outcomes come from unspecified MaxProp simulation runs; the settings shape the labels and thus the model.
  • Feature set composition (encounter frequency, buffer occupancy, hop count, message age, TTL) = chosen by authors
    Selected by hand as model inputs; no ablation or justification beyond domain intuition.
assumptions (4)
  • domain assumption The ONE simulator with SPMBM mobility accurately emulates post-disaster urban mobility
    Stated in Sections 3.4 and 5.1; no validation against real disaster mobility traces.
  • domain assumption MaxProp's implementation in ONE is a faithful and correctly configured baseline
    Performance comparisons assume the baseline represents the standard MaxProp protocol.
  • domain assumption Delivery outcomes from MaxProp simulations are valid labels for training a relay-suitability classifier
    Section 5.2 builds the training set from such labels; if the labels are unrepresentative, the model is unrepresentative.
  • domain assumption XGBoost runtime inference has negligible overhead and its predictions improve forwarding
    No runtime cost measurements are provided; the claimed practicality depends on this.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of ML-MaxProp: Bridging Machine Learning and Delay-Tolerant Routing for Resilient Post-Disaster Communication." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/2G5DEKA5

@misc{pith2026250820077,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: ML-MaxProp: Bridging Machine Learning and Delay-Tolerant Routing for Resilient Post-Disaster Communication},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/2G5DEKA5}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2508.20077}
}
read the original abstract

In disaster-stricken and large-scale urban emergency scenarios, ensuring reliable communication remains a formidable challenge, as collapsed infrastructure, unpredictable mobility, and severely constrained resources disrupt conventional networks. Delay-Tolerant Networks (DTNs), though resilient through their store-carry-forward paradigm, reveal the fundamental weaknesses of classical protocols - Epidemic, Spray-and-Wait, and MaxProp - when confronted with sparse encounters, buffer shortages, and volatile connectivity. To address these obstacles, this study proposes ML-MaxProp, a hybrid routing protocol that strengthens MaxProp with supervised machine learning. By leveraging contextual features such as encounter frequency, hop count, buffer occupancy, message age, and time-to-live (TTL), ML-MaxProp predicts relay suitability in real time, transforming rigid heuristics into adaptive intelligence. Extensive simulations in the ONE environment using the Helsinki SPMBM mobility model show that ML-MaxProp consistently surpasses baseline protocols, achieving higher delivery probability, lower latency, and reduced overhead. Statistical validation further shows that these improvements are both significant and robust, even under highly resource-constrained and unstable conditions. Overall, this work shows that ML-MaxProp is not just an incremental refinement but a lightweight, adaptive, and practical solution to one of the hardest challenges in DTNs: sustaining mission-critical communication when infrastructure collapses and every forwarding decision becomes critical.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

36 extracted references · 25 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Delay and disruption tolerant networking for terrestrial and TCP/IP applications: A systematic literature review,

    A. Castillo, C. Juiz, and B. Bermejo, "Delay and disruption tolerant networking for terrestrial and TCP/IP applications: A systematic literature review," Network, vol. 4, no. 3, pp. 237–259, 2024, doi: 10.3390/network4030012

    work page doi:10.3390/network4030012 2024

  2. [2]

    Development of delay-tolerant networking protocols for reliable data transmission in space networks: A simulation-based approach,

    M. A. A. Mamun, M. Li, and B. K. Pramanik, "Development of delay-tolerant networking protocols for reliable data transmission in space networks: A simulation-based approach," IEEE Access, vol. 12, pp. 178642–178658, 2024, doi: 10.1109/ACCESS.2024.3501676

    work page arXiv 2024

  3. [3]

    Challenges and opportunities to enhance buffer management for disaster area in delay tolerant network: A review with performance analysis,

    A. Prasad, S. Gurung, and K. Sharma, "Challenges and opportunities to enhance buffer management for disaster area in delay tolerant network: A review with performance analysis," in Proc. 2024 Int. Conf. Electr. Electron. Comput. Technol. (ICEECT), Greater Noida, India, 2024, pp. 1–9, doi: 10.1109/ICEECT61758.2024.10739286

    arXiv 2024

  4. [4]

    IPS: Integrating pose with speech for enhancement of body pose estimation in VR remote collaboration,

    S. Kang, S. Jeon, and W. Woo, "IPS: Integrating pose with speech for enhancement of body pose estimation in VR remote collaboration," in Proc. 2023 IEEE Conf. Virtual Reality and 3D User Interfaces Abstracts and Workshops (VRW), Shanghai, China, 2023, pp. 637– 638, doi: 10.1109/VRW58643.2023.00161

    arXiv 2023

  5. [5]

    A multi -attribute-based data forwarding scheme for delay tolerant networks,

    A. Abbas and R. Hasan, "A multi -attribute-based data forwarding scheme for delay tolerant networks," J. Supercomput., vol. 80, pp. 6356–6381, 2024, doi: 10.1007/s11227- 023-05702-5

    doi:10.1007/s11227- 2024

  6. [6]

    Optimal routing with machine learning classification in delay tolerant networks,

    A. Bhavani, A. V. Ramana, and A. S. N. Chakravarthy, "Optimal routing with machine learning classification in delay tolerant networks," in Proc. 2024 Int. Conf. IoT Based Control Netw. Intell. Syst. (ICICNIS) , Bengaluru, India, 2024, pp. 1431–1436, doi: 10.1109/ICICNIS64247.2024.10823169

    arXiv 2024

  7. [7]

    A novel cross -layer framework for large scale emergency communications,

    V. S. Ha Huynh and M. Radenkovic, "A novel cross -layer framework for large scale emergency communications," 2017 13th International Wireless Communica tions and Mobile Computing Conference (IWCMC), Valencia, Spain, 2017, pp. 2152 -2157, doi: 10.1109/IWCMC.2017.7986616

    work page arXiv 2017

  8. [8]

    An optimized load balancing probabilistic protocol for delay tolerant networks,

    I. A. Shah and M. Ahmed, "An optimized load balancing probabilistic protocol for delay tolerant networks," SN Comput. Sci., vol. 6, art. no. 140, 2025, doi: 10.1007/s42979-025- 03681-3

    doi:10.1007/s42979-025- 2025

Show all 36 references
  1. [9]

    Machine learning based intelligent routing for VDTNs,

    S. Liu, H. Shen, B. L. Smith, and V. Fessmann, "Machine learning based intelligent routing for VDTNs," in Proc. 2023 32nd Int. Conf. Comput. Commun. Netw. (ICCCN) , Honolulu, HI, USA, 2023, pp. 1–10, doi: 10.1109/ICCCN58024.2023.10230185

    2023

  2. [10]

    A review of applicable technologies, routing protocols, requirements, and architecture for disaster area networks,

    M. M. Alsayyed, S. Manickam, E. R. N. Wulandari, I. D. M. Widia, and S. Karuppayah, "A review of applicable technologies, routing protocols, requirements, and architecture for disaster area networks," IEEE Access , vol. 13, pp. 91129–91160, 2025, doi: 10.1109/ACCESS.2025.3570733

    2025

  3. [11]

    Coupled electromagnetic-thermal analysis of a dry-type power transformer,

    P. Tian, H. Jiang, C. Yang, S. Zheng, G. Wang, and C. Zhang, "Coupled electromagnetic-thermal analysis of a dry-type power transformer," in Proc. 2023 IEEE 4th China Int. Youth Conf. Electr. Eng. (CIYCEE ), Chengdu, China, 2023, pp. 1–5, doi: 10.1109/CIYCEE59789.2023.10401562

    2023

  4. [12]

    A survey on machine learning techniques for routing optimization in SDN,

    R. Amin, E. Rojas, A. Aqdus, S. Ramzan, D. Casillas-Perez, and J. M. Arco, "A survey on machine learning techniques for routing optimization in SDN," IEEE Access, vol. 9, pp. 104582–104611, 2021, doi: 10.1109/ACCESS.2021.3099092

    2021

  5. [13]

    Time-series flexible resampling for continuous and real -time finger character recognition,

    T. Nitta, S. Hagimoto, K. Miyamura, R. Okada, and T. Nakanishi, "Time-series flexible resampling for continuous and real -time finger character recognition," in Proc. 2022 IEEE/WIC/ACM Int. Joint Conf. Web Int ell. Intell. Agent Technol. (WI-IAT), Niagara Falls, ON, Canada, 20...

    2022

  6. [14]

    Applications of machine learning in networking: A survey of current issues and future challenges,

    M. A. Ridwan, N. A. M. Radzi, F. Abdullah, and Y . E. Jalil, "Applications of machine learning in networking: A survey of current issues and future challenges," IEEE Access, vol. 9, pp. 52523–52556, 2021, doi: 10.1109/ACCESS.2021.3069210

    2021

  7. [15]

    Cognitive Caching at the Edges for Mobile Social Community Networks: A Multi -Agent Deep Reinforcement Learning Approac h,

    M. Radenkovic and V. S. H. Huynh, “Cognitive Caching at the Edges for Mobile Social Community Networks: A Multi -Agent Deep Reinforcement Learning Approac h,” IEEE Access, vol. 8, pp. 179561–179573, Sep. 2020, doi: 10.1109/ACCESS.2020.3027707

    2020

  8. [16]

    PECCS 2019: 34-45

    Vu San Ha Huynh, Milena Radenkovic: Interdependent Multi-layer Spatial Temporal- based Caching in Heterogeneous Mobile Edge and Fog Networks. PECCS 2019: 34-45

    2019

  9. [17]

    Elastically accelerating lookup on virtual SDN flow tables for software -defined cloud gateways,

    B. Xiong, J. Wu, Q. Huang, J. Zhao, Q. Tang, J. Zhang, K. Yang, and K. Li, "Elastically accelerating lookup on virtual SDN flow tables for software -defined cloud gateways," Comput. Netw., vol. 238, Art. no. 110092, 2024, doi: 10.1016/j.comnet.2023.110092

    2024

  10. [18]

    Extending sparse tensor accelerators to support multiple compression formats,

    E. Qin et al., "Extending sparse tensor accelerators to support multiple compression formats," in Proc. 2021 IEEE Int. Parallel Distrib. Process. Symp. (IPDPS), Portland, OR, USA, 2021, pp. 1014–1024, doi: 10.1109/IPDPS49936.2021.00110

    2021

  11. [19]

    Comparison of machine learning techniques applied to traffic prediction of real wireless network,

    D. Alekseeva, N. Stepanov, A. Veprev, A. Sharapova, E. S. Lohan, and A. Ometov, "Comparison of machine learning techniques applied to traffic prediction of real wireless network," IEEE Access , vol. 9, pp. 159495–159514, 2021, doi: 10.1109/ACCESS.2021.3129850

    2021

  12. [20]

    Multi -similarity fusion- based label propagation for predicting microbes potentially associated with diseases,

    M.-M. Yin, Y .-L. Gao, J. Shang, C. -H. Zheng, and J. -X. Liu, "Multi -similarity fusion- based label propagation for predicting microbes potentially associated with diseases," Future Gener. Comput. Syst. , vol. 134, pp. 247–255, 2022, doi: 10.1016/j.future.2022.04.012

    2022 doi

  13. [21]

    Energy-efficient locomotion generation and theoretical analysis of a quasi -passive dynamic walker,

    L. Li, I. Tokuda, and F. Asano, "Energy-efficient locomotion generation and theoretical analysis of a quasi -passive dynamic walker," IEEE Robot. Autom. Lett., vol. 5, no. 3, pp. 4305–4312, Jul. 2020, doi: 10.1109/LRA.2020.2996585

    2020

  14. [22]

    Enhancing DTN rout ing strategies with deep reinforcement learning in disaster recovery networks,

    X. Wen and L. Tan, "Enhancing DTN rout ing strategies with deep reinforcement learning in disaster recovery networks," in Proc. 2024 6th Int. Conf. Frontier Technol. Inf. Comput. (ICFTIC) , Qingdao, China, 2024, pp. 450–456, doi: 10.1109/ICFTIC64248.2024.10913424

    2024

  15. [23]

    Recent Advances in Disaster Emergency Response Planning: Integrating Optimization, Machine Learning, and Simulation,

    F. Pu, Z. Li, Y . Wu, C. Ma and R. Zhao, "Recent Advances in Disaster Emergency Response Planning: Integrating Optimization, Machine Learning, and Simulation," arXiv preprint, arXiv:2505.03979, May 2025. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2505.03979

    2025 doi arXiv

  16. [24]

    Design considerations of implementing process bus and PTP along an IEC 61850-based main line traction power system,

    R. Sully, L. Townsend and S. Dayabhai, "Design considerations of implementing process bus and PTP along an IEC 61850-based main line traction power system," in Proc. 17th Int. Conf. Developments in Power System Protection (DPSP), Manchester, UK, 2024, pp. 349–355, doi: 10.1049...

    2024

  17. [25]

    Mobility Context Aware Routing Protocol in DTN,

    J. Koteich, N. Mitton and R. Wolhuter, "Mobility Context Aware Routing Protocol in DTN," in Proc. 2025 Int. Conf. Information Networking (ICOIN), Chiang Mai, Thailand, 2025, pp. 12–17, doi: 10.1109/ICOIN63865.2025.10993180

    2025

  18. [26]

    Traffic prediction in SDN for explainable QoS using deep learning approach,

    G. Wassie, J. Ding and Y . Wondie, "Traffic prediction in SDN for explainable QoS using deep learning approach," Sci. Rep., vol. 13, no. 20607, Nov. 2023, doi: 10.1038/s41598 - 023-46471-8

    2023 doi

  19. [27]

    Weisfeiler and Leman Go Neural: Higher -Order Graph Neural Networks,

    C. Morris, M. Ritzert, M. Fey, W. L. Hamilton, J. E. Lenssen, G. Rattan and M. Grohe, "Weisfeiler and Leman Go Neural: Higher -Order Graph Neural Networks," in Proc. AAAI Conf. Artif. Intell., vol. 33, no. 1, pp. 4602–4609, 2019, doi: 10.1609/aaai.v33i01.33014602

    2019 doi

  20. [28]

    Performance Evaluation of DTN Routing Protocols on Map -Based Social Mobility Models for DTN Networks,

    E. M. Sammou, "Performance Evaluation of DTN Routing Protocols on Map -Based Social Mobility Models for DTN Networks," J. Theor. Appl. Inf. Technol., vol. 101, no. 22, pp. 7339–7356, Nov. 2023. [Online]. Available: https://www.jatit.org/volumes/Vol101No22/15Vol101No22.pdf

    2023

  21. [29]

    Improved Multistage Continuous -Time Pipelined Analog-to-Digital Converters and the Implicit Decimation Property,

    S. K. Manivannan and S. Pavan, "Improved Multistage Continuous -Time Pipelined Analog-to-Digital Converters and the Implicit Decimation Property," IEEE Transactions on Circuits and Systems I: Regular Papers , vol. 69, no. 8, pp. 3102–3113, Aug. 2022, doi: 10.1109/TCSI.2022.3173563

    2022

  22. [30]

    Enhancing Emergency Communication for Future Smart Cities with Random Forest Model,

    C. Ye and M. Radenkovic, “Enhancing Emergency Communication for Future Smart Cities with Random Forest Model, ” arXiv prepr int arXiv:2411.06455, Nov. 2024., doi: https://arxiv.org/abs/2411.06455

    2024 arXiv

  23. [31]

    Vehicular mobility monitoring using remote sensing and deep learning on a UAV-based mobile computing platform,

    M. Bakirci, "Vehicular mobility monitoring using remote sensing and deep learning on a UAV-based mobile computing platform," Measurement, vol. 244, 116579, 2025, doi: 10.1016/j.measurement.2024.116579

    2025

  24. [32]

    B5GEMINI: AI-Driven Network Digital Twin,

    A. Mozo, A. Karamchandani, S. Gómez-Canaval, M. Sanz, J. I. Moreno and A. Pastor, "B5GEMINI: AI-Driven Network Digital Twin," Sensors, vol. 22, no. 11, p. 4106, 2022, doi: 10.3390/s22114106

    2022 doi

  25. [33]

    Sizing Optimization of Whale Optimization Algorithm for Hybrid Stand -Alone Photovoltaic System,

    M. F. M. Bakri, Z. Othman, S. I. Sulaiman and N. H. A. Rahman, "Sizing Optimization of Whale Optimization Algorithm for Hybrid Stand -Alone Photovoltaic System," in Proc. IEEE 17th Int. Colloq. Signal Process. & Its Appl. (CSPA), Langkawi, Malaysia, 2021, pp. 18–23, doi: 10.11...

    2021

  26. [34]

    Adaptive Real -Time Predictive Collaborative Content Discovery and Retrieval in Mobile Disconnection Prone Networks,

    M. Radenkovic, V. S. H. Huynh and P. Manzoni, "Adaptive Real -Time Predictive Collaborative Content Discovery and Retrieval in Mobile Disconnection Prone Networks," in IEEE Access, vol. 6, pp. 32188-32206, 2018, doi: 10.1109/ACCESS.2018.2840040

    2018

  27. [35]

    Towards Low Cost Prototyping of Mobile Opportunistic Disconnection Tolerant Networks and Systems,

    M. Radenkovic, J. Crowcroft and M. H. Rehmani, "Towards Low Cost Prototyping of Mobile Opportunistic Disconnection Tolerant Networks and Systems," in IEEE Access, vol. 4, pp. 5309-5321, 2016, doi: 10.1109/ACCESS.2016.2606501

    2016

  28. [36]

    Enabling Real -time Communications and Services in Heterogeneous Networks of Drones and Vehicles,

    M. Radenkovic, V. S. Ha Huynh, R. John and P. Manzoni, "Enabling Real -time Communications and Services in Heterogeneous Networks of Drones and Vehicles," 2019 International Conference on Wireless and Mobile Computing, Networking and Communications (WiMob), Barcelona, Spain, 2...

    2019

Pith tools

Reviewed August 5, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.