我们的竞争解决模型是错误的吗？
Is Our Model for Contention Resolution Wrong?
摘要：
随机二进制指数退避（BEB）是用于协调对共享信道的接入的流行算法。BEB拥有超过四十年的运营历史，目前是多个无线标准的重要组成部分。尽管有这样的记录，但先前的理论结果表明，在突发流量下，（1）BEB产生较差的完工时间，（2）可能有更好的算法。迄今为止，这些调查结果在实践中的表现程度尚未得到解决。为了解决这个问题，我们研究了针对BEB的最强情况之一：同时开始争用无线信道的$n$数据包。使用Network Simulator 3，我们比较了受BEB启发的最新算法，但其最大完工时间保证更优越。令人惊讶的是，我们发现这些新的算法明显表现不佳。通过进一步的调查，我们确定的罪魁祸首是一个有缺陷的，但常见的抽象碰撞的成本。我们的实验结果得到了分析论证的补充，即碰撞的数量-而不仅仅是完工时间-是一个重要的优化指标。我们相信，这些研究结果的竞争解决算法的设计的影响。
英文摘要：
Randomized binary exponential backoff (BEB) is a popular algorithm for coordinating access to a shared channel. With an operational history exceeding four decades, BEB is currently an important component of several wireless standards. Despite this track record, prior theoretical results indicate that under bursty traffic (1) BEB yields poor makespan and (2) superior algorithms are possible. To date, the degree to which these findings manifest in practice has not been resolved. To address this issue, we examine one of the strongest cases against BEB: $n$ packets that simultaneously begin contending for the wireless channel. Using Network Simulator 3, we compare against more recent algorithms that are inspired by BEB, but whose makespan guarantees are superior. Surprisingly, we discover that these newer algorithms significantly underperform. Through further investigation, we identify as the culprit a flawed but common abstraction regarding the cost of collisions. Our experimental results are complemented by analytical arguments that the number of collisions -- and not solely makespan -- is an important metric to optimize. We believe that these findings have implications for the design of contention-resolution algorithms.
机构、总结、中文摘要均由AI分析而来，可能存在错误，请以论文正文为准。
