MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W126718644 · doi:10.2316/p.2010.676-050

An Experimental Model of Relay Deployment Planning Tool for a Wireless Sensor Network System to Monitor Civil Engineering Structures

2010· article· en· W126718644 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
C. Hirai, Kenichi Soga

Bibliographic record

VenueParallel and Distributed Computing and Networks · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicEnergy Efficient Wireless Sensor Networks
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSoftware deploymentDefault gatewayWireless sensor networkComputer scienceRelayReliability (semiconductor)WirelessKey distribution in wireless sensor networksWireless networkComputer networkDistributed computingReal-time computingTelecommunications

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

It is essential to monitor deteriorated civil engineering structures cautiously to detect symptoms of their serious disruptions. A wireless sensor network can be an effective system for monitoring civil engineering structures. It is fast to deploy sensors especially in difficult-to-access areas, and it is extendable without any cable extensions. Since our target is to monitor deteriorations of civil engineering structures such as cracks at tunnel linings, most of the locations of sensors are known, and sensors are not required to move dynamically. Therefore, we focus on developing a deployment plan of a static network in order to reduce the value of a cost function such as initial installation cost and summation of communication distances of the network. The key issue of the deployment is the location of relays that forward sensing data from sensors to a data collection device called a gateway. In this paper, we propose a relay deployment-planning tool that can be used to design a wireless sensor network for monitoring civil engineering structures. For the planning tool, we formalize the model and implement a local search based algorithm to find a quasi-optimal solution. Our solution guarantees two routings from a sensor to a gateway, which can provide higher reliability of the network. We also show the application of our experimental tool to the actual environment in the London Underground.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.034

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.010
GPT teacher head0.238
Teacher spread0.229 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations5
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueParallel and Distributed Computing and NetworksSame topicEnergy Efficient Wireless Sensor NetworksFrench-language works237,207