2016/8/31

In the morning, I reached the lab at around 9:00, starting to optimize the disciplines. Rather than try to find short-cuts, I went back to the final goal, that reducing the dissemination time by the evolution feature. What could bring about it? I can get the answer from its mathematical expression. The physical distance L, the diameter D and the most operational one, that is the depth of the binary tree each node holds. Diameter changes naturally as the network grows. It's a global feature which has nothing to do with the scheme. The way to define L is clear, and I know what to expect from L as well as what is the goal of defining L. Temporarily, I think the span of a node's physical searching area  should subject to that the node could find at least one new node. The tough factor is the last one. I want to cut down the binary tree by the characteristic of evolution. Comparing to paper A, I think there should also be supports from the mechanism. Evolution means the appearance new nodes, so L should satisfy the appearance of new nodes in a node's physical and social range. Since our work is based on paper A, our mechanism should satisfy the conditions of paper A. For example, we have to assure that a node can find an active node in it's social and physical range. 

In the afternoon, I work on the feasibility of the proposed scheme. And I find out the main constraints to realize it, which is that new nodes are socially and physically reachable. 

In the evening, I wasted nearly two hours listening to music and shopping on the Internet. I express the scheme systematically.