A time dependent performance model for multihop wireless networks with CBR traffic

In this paper, we develop a performance modeling technique for analyzing the time varying network layer queueing behavior of multihop wireless networks with constant bit rate traffic. Our approach is a hybrid of fluid flow queueing modeling and a time varying connectivity matrix. Network queues are modeled using fluid-flow based differential equation models which are solved using numerical methods, while node mobility is modeled using deterministic or stochastic modeling of adjacency matrix elements. Numerical and simulation experiments show that the new approach can provide reasonably accurate results with significant improvements in the computation time compared to standard simulation tools. © 2010 IEEE

Time-varying performance analysis of multihop wireless networks with CBR traffic

In this paper, we develop a performance modeling technique for analyzing the time-varying network layer queuing behavior of multihop wireless networks with constant bit rate (CBR) traffic. Our approach is a hybrid of a time-varying adjacency matrix and a fluid flow queuing network model. The mobile network topology is modeled using a time-varying adjacency matrix, whereas node queues are modeled using fluid-flow-based differential equations that are solved using numerical methods. Numerical and simulation experiments show that this new approach can provide reasonably accurate results. Moreover, when compared with the computation time required in a standard discrete event simulator, the fluid-flow-based model is shown to be a more scalable tool. Finally, an illustrative example of our modeling technique application is given to show its capability of capturing the time-varying network performance as a function of traffic load, node mobility, and wireless link quality

Sex differences in eye gaze and symbolic cueing of attention

Observing a face with averted eyes results in a reflexive shift of attention to the gazed-at location. Here we present results that show that this effect is weaker in males than in females (Experiment 1). This result is predicted by the ‘extreme male brain’ theory of autism (Baron-Cohen, 2003), which suggests that males in the normal population should display more autism-like traits than females (e.g., poor joint attention). Indeed, participants′ scores on the Autism-Spectrum Quotient (Baron-Cohen, Wheelwright, Stott, Bolton, & Goodyear, 2001) negatively correlated with cueing magnitude. Furthermore, exogenous orienting did not differ between the sexes in two peripheral cueing experiments (Experiments 2a and 2b). However, a final experiment showed that using non-predictive arrows instead of eyes as a central cue also revealed a large gender difference. This demonstrates that reduced orienting from central cues in males generalizes beyond gaze cues. These results show that while peripheral cueing is equivalent in the male and female brains, the attention systems of the two sexes treat noninformative symbolic cues very differently

Influence of hand position on the near-effect in 3D attention

Voluntary reorienting of attention in real depth situations is characterized by an attentional bias to locations near the viewer once attention is deployed to a spatially cued object in depth. Previously this effect (initially referred to as the ‘near-effect’) was attributed to access of a 3D viewer-centred spatial representation for guiding attention in 3D space. The aim of this study was to investigate whether the near-bias could have been associated with the position of the response-hand, always near the viewer in previous studies investigating endogenous attentional shifts in real depth. In Experiment 1, the response-hand was placed at either the near or far target depth in a depth cueing task. Placing the response-hand at the far target depth abolished the near-effect, but failed to bias spatial attention to the far location. Experiment 2 showed that the response-hand effect was not modulated by the presence of an additional passive hand, whereas Experiment 3 confirmed that attentional prioritization of the passive hand was not masked by the influence of the responding hand on spatial attention in Experiment 2. The pattern of results is most consistent with the idea that response preparation can modulate spatial attention within a 3D viewer-centred spatial representation

Predictive gaze cues affect face evaluations: The effect of facial emotion

When we see someone change their direction of gaze, we spontaneously follow their eyes because we expect people to look at interesting objects. Bayliss and Tipper (2006) examined the consequences of observing this expectancy being either confirmed or violated by faces producing reliable or unreliable gaze cues. Participants viewed different faces that would consistently look at the target, or consistently look away from the target: The faces that consistently looked towards targets were subsequently chosen as being more trustworthy than the faces that consistently looked away from targets. The current work demonstrates that these gaze contingency effects are only detected when faces create a positive social context by smiling, but not in the negative context when all the faces held angry or neutral expressions. These data suggest that implicit processing of the reward contingencies associated with gaze cues relies on a positive emotional expression to maintain expectations of a favourable outcome of joint attention episodes

The preview search task: Evidence for visual marking.

A series of experiments are reviewed providing evidence for the idea that when new visual objects are prioritized, old objects are inhibited by a top-down controlled suppression mechanism - A process referred to as visual marking. Evidence for the top-down aspect of visual marking is presented, by showing that new object prioritization, as measured in the preview paradigm, depends on task settings and available attentional resources. Evidence for the inhibitory aspect is presented, by showing that selection of new items is impaired when these items share features with the old items. Such negative carryover effects occur within as well as between trials. Alternative accounts and the evidence for them is discussed. It is concluded that the various accounts are not mutually exclusive and that the data is best explained by a combination of mechanisms. © 2006 Psychology Press Ltd