Context-aware Opportunistic Routing in Mobile Ad-hoc Networks Incorporating Node Mobility

Opportunistic routing (OR) employs a list of candi- dates to improve reliability of wireless transmission. However, list-based OR features restrict the freedom of opportunism, since only the listed nodes can compete for packet forwarding. Additionally, the list is statically generated based on a single metric prior to data transmission, which is not appropriate for mobile ad-hoc networks. This paper provides a thorough perfor- mance evaluation of a new protocol - Context-aware Opportunistic Routing (COR). The contributions of COR are threefold. First, it uses various types of context information simultaneously such as link quality, geographic progress, and residual energy of nodes to make routing decisions. Second, it allows all qualified nodes to participate in packet forwarding. Third, it exploits the relative mobility of nodes to further improve performance. Simulation results show that COR can provide efficient routing in mobile environments, and it outperforms existing solutions that solely rely on a single metric by nearly 20 - 40 %.

Space, diffusion and mobility

Given its origins in traditional dialectology, and given advances in our understanding of the social embedding of language variation, it is paradoxical that space should be one of the categories that has received least attention of all in variationist sociolinguistics. Until recently, space has largely been treated as an empty stage on which sociolinguistic processes are enacted. It has been unexamined, untheorized, and its role in shaping and being shaped by variation and change untested. One function of this chapter, therefore, is to assert that space makes a difference, and to begin, in a very hesitant way, to map out what a geographically informed variation analysis might need to address. It also examines variationist interactions with the related concept of mobility. It might be reasonable to think that human geographers would provide some clues on how to proceed. As we will see, they have engaged in a great deal of soul searching about the goals of their discipline, its very existence as a separate field of enquiry, and the directions it should take. Indeed there are remarkable parallels between the recent history of human geographic thought, and interest in language variation across space. Although space has been undertheorized in variation studies, a number of researchers, from the traditional dialectologists through to those interested in the dialectology of mobility and contact, have, of course, been actively engaged in research on geographical variation and language use. Their work will be contextualized here to highlight both the parallels with theory-building in human geography, but also some of the criticisms of earlier approaches which have fed through to human geography, but remain largely unquestioned in variationist practice. The chapter therefore presents a brief theoretical background to space and mobility, before exemplifying these concepts in variationist research through an examination of, for example, the spatial diffusion of linguistic innovations, the spatial configuration of linguistic boundaries and initial steps to examine the consequences of mobility for variationist research.

The role of mundane mobility and contact in dialect death and dialect birth

Urry begins his 2007 book, Mobilities, by throwing some quite stunning statistics at his readers: in 2010, there were one billion legal international arrivals at ports and airports; in 1800 people in the US travelled on average 50 metres per day, today it is 50 kilometres per day; 8.7% of world employment is in tourism; and, at any one time, there are 360,000 passengers in flight above the United States (2007: 3-4). But very many of these mobilities for the individuals concerned are or have become rather unexceptional – a flight to a holiday in Majorca or Florida, a journey on a crowded commuter train into Madrid or Tokyo, a cross-Channel ferry to Calais in France to pick up some cheap wine and a camembert. Whilst much of the theoretically influential dialectological literature on mobility reports on long-distance, often permanent, often dangerous migrations, I turn our attention here to the dialectological consequences of this unexceptional everyday movement. I will argue here that, just as more dramatic and long-distance mobilities can trigger linguistic change, so too can the much more mundane movements we engage in in everyday life. I demonstrate that the linguistic consequences of that contact are similar if not the same – perhaps less dramatic, perhaps involving the convergence of an initially less divergent array of variants – but typologically of the same ilk. And I demonstrate that because these mobilities have been long-term, intensive and ongoing, their consequences on the dialect landscape have been highly significant. Important to remember, however, is that these mobilities are socially stratified and unevenly distributed. As Wolff put it: “the suggestion of free and equal mobility is … a deception, since we don’t all have the same access to the road” (1993: 253).