Towards the design of efficient nonbeacon-enabled ZigBee networks

This paper presents experimental results of the communication performance evaluation of a prototype ZigBee-based patient monitoring system commissioned in an in-patient floor of a Portuguese hospital (HPG – Hospital Privado de Guimar~aes). Besides, it revisits relevant problems that affect the performance of nonbeacon-enabled ZigBee networks. Initially, the presence of hidden-nodes and the impact of sensor node mobility are discussed. It was observed, for instance, that the message delivery ratio in a star network consisting of six wireless electrocardiogram sensor devices may decrease from 100% when no hidden-nodes are present to 83.96% when half of the sensor devices are unable to detect the transmissions made by the other half. An additional aspect which affects the communication reliability is a deadlock condition that can occur if routers are unable to process incoming packets during the backoff part of the CSMA-CA mechanism. A simple approach to increase the message delivery ratio in this case is proposed and its effectiveness is verified. The discussion and results presented in this paper aim to contribute to the design of efficient networks,and are valid to other scenarios and environments rather than hospitals.

Anotação, numa perspectiva de Direito Penal e de Criminologia, ao Acórdão do Supremo Tribunal de Justiça (português), de 13 de Abril de 2009 [Juiz Conselheiro Rodrigues da COSTA (Relator), Juiz Conselheiro Arménio SOTTOMAYOR (vencido nos termos da declaração junta) e Juiz Conselheiro Mota MIRANDA] - são o «lenocínio» e a prostituição, entre adultos livres, crimes? «Roxanne, you don't have to put on the red light»

Resumo: 1 – Sumário do Acórdão do Supremo Tribunal de Justiça, de 13 de Abril de 2011; 2 – Texto completo do Acórdão do Supremo Tribunal de Justiça, de 13 de Abril de 2009, Juiz Conselheiro Rodrigues da COSTA (Relator), Juiz Conselheiro Arménio SOTTOMAYOR (vencido nos termos da declaração junta) e Juiz Conselheiro Mota MIRANDA: cfr. http://www.dgsi.pt , 26 de Abril de 2011; 3 – Anotação; 3.1 – Introdução à anotação; 3.2 – A questão do suposto «bem jurídico» que seria tutelado pelo crime de «lenocínio» p.p.p.p.p. 169.º do código penal português; 3.2.1 – Ainda a questão do suposto «bem jurídico» que seria tutelado pelo crime de «lenocínio» p.p.p.p.p. 169.º do código penal português: uma maior procura e concretização jurídica e científica; 4 – Conclusões; § Abstract: 1 - Summary of the Sentence of the Supreme Court of Justice, 13 of April of 2011; 2 - Complete text of the Sentence of the Supreme Court of Justice, 13 of April of 2009, Advising Judge Rodrigues da COSTA (Reporter), Advising Judge Arménio SOTTOMAYOR (looser in the terms of the together declaration) and Advising Judge Mota MIRANDA: cfr. http://www.dgsi.pt , 26 of April of 2011; 3 - Notation; 3.1 - Introduction to the notation; 3.2 - The question of the presumption «legally protected interest» that would be tutored person for the crime of «pimpery (“pimping”)» p.p.p.p.p. 169.º of the Portuguese criminal code; 3.2.1 - Still the question of the presumption «legally protected interest» that would be tutored person for the crime of «pimpery» («pimping») p.p.p.p.p. 169.º of the Portuguese criminal code: a bigger search and legal and scientific concretion; 4 - Conclusions;