The ALOHA System¶
Abramson, N. (1970). The ALOHA System: Another Alternative for Computer Communications. Proceedings of the Fall Joint Computer Conference (AFIPS), 281-285.
Cited by¶
2 citations across 2 artifacts.
Each citation links to the sentence it supports in the citing article.
Primes¶
- Anti-Coordination Game
- In communications, two transmitters sharing a band each do better transmitting at a different time, frequency, or code, which is what ALOHA, CSMA, and frequency-hopping respond to.
This sourceIntroduces the ALOHA random-access protocol: shared-channel transmission with collisions as the sameness penalty, and random backoff as the symmetry-breaking device — the basis of the CSMA family.
- In communications, two transmitters sharing a band each do better transmitting at a different time, frequency, or code, which is what ALOHA, CSMA, and frequency-hopping respond to.
- Interference and Contention
- The CPU-scheduling contention model (context-switch overhead, cache-miss increase, reduced throughput when processes compete for CPU) transfers directly to network-flow contention: packet loss, retransmission overhead, and reduced goodput increase when flows compete for bandwidth, a transfer made explicit when Abramson (1970) modelled the ALOHA wireless channel as a CSMA contention queue analogous to CPU-scheduler arbitration.
This sourceFoundational random-access networking paper: models wireless-channel contention as an arbitration problem analogous to CPU-scheduler queueing, demonstrating cross-domain transfer of the contention model.
- The CPU-scheduling contention model (context-switch overhead, cache-miss increase, reduced throughput when processes compete for CPU) transfers directly to network-flow contention: packet loss, retransmission overhead, and reduced goodput increase when flows compete for bandwidth, a transfer made explicit when Abramson (1970) modelled the ALOHA wireless channel as a CSMA contention queue analogous to CPU-scheduler arbitration.
Verification¶
Does it exist? Confirmed. This work's DOI resolves to a registered record, which fixes its identity. That is all it fixes.
Does it back the claim? Not recorded. Neither this nor any other of the 2 citations of this work carries a recorded support check.
Support is checked per citation rather than per work — the same source can be cited soundly in one article and wrongly in another. Per-citation recording began recently, so a citation with no recorded check is a gap in the record rather than evidence it went unchecked.
See how references were verified.
Registry ID ref:4844c6184048 · see in the full table