You are provided with the abstract of a scientific paper and the abstracts of the papers it references. Your task is to write a Related Work section for the main paper. This section should concisely summarize and integrate the key points from the cited abstracts, reflecting how they relate to the main paper's contributions and context. In your summary, use numerical citation markers like [1], [2], etc., to refer to the corresponding papers.

Main Abstract:
Ad hoc networks rely on the cooperation of the nodes participating in the network to forward packets for each other. A node may decide not to cooperate to save its resources while still using the network to relay its traffic. If too many nodes exhibit this behavior, network performance degrades and cooperating nodes may find themselves unfairly loaded. Most previous efforts to counter this behavior have relied on further cooperation between nodes to exchange reputation information about other nodes. If a node observes another node not participating correctly, it reports this observation to other nodes who then take action to avoid being affected and potentially punish the bad node by refusing to forward its traffic. Unfortunately, such second-hand reputation information is subject to false accusations and requires maintaining trust relationships with other nodes. The objective of OCEAN is to avoid this trust-management machinery and see how far we can get simply by using direct first-hand observations of other nodes' behavior. We find that, in many scenarios, OCEAN can do as well as, or even better than, schemes requiring second-hand reputation exchanges. This encouraging result could possibly help obviate solutions requiring trust-management for some contexts.

Cited Abstract(s):
[1]: This paper describes two techniques that improve throughput in an ad hoc network in the presence of nodes that agree to forward packets but fail to do so. To mitigate this problem, we propose categorizing nodes based upon their dynamically measured behavior. We use a watchdog that identifies misbehaving nodes and a pathrater that helps routing protocols avoid these nodes. Through simulation we evaluate watchdog and pathrater using packet throughput, percentage of overhead (routing) transmissions, and the accuracy of misbehaving node detection. When used together in a network with moderate mobility, the two techniques increase throughput by 17 in the presence of 40 misbehaving nodes, while increasing the percentage of overhead transmissions from the standard routing protocol's 9 to 17 . During extreme mobility, watchdog and pathrater can increase network throughput by 27 , while increasing the overhead transmissions from the standard routing protocol's 12 to 24 .
In contrast to securing the routing layer of ad hoc networks, some researchers have also focused on simply detecting and reporting misleading routing misbehavior. Watchdog and Pathrater [1] use observation-based techniques to detect misbehaving nodes and report observed misbehavior back to the source of the traffic. Pathrater manages trust and route selection based on these reports. This allows nodes to choose better paths along which to route their traffic by routing around the misbehaving nodes. However, the scheme does not punish malicious nodes; instead, they are relieved of their forwarding burden.