Mechanisms to locate noncooperative transmitters in wireless networks based on residual signal strengths
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract This paper proposes new mechanisms for locating or tracking a noncooperative and immobile transmitter in wireless communication networks. They rely on a set of trusted cooperative receivers that are able to measure the residual strengths of the received signals from the transmitter. These mechanisms cannot rely on the information provided by the transmitter because the latter can be malicious. The best solution presented in the literature to solve this problem is the hyperbolic position bounding algorithm. Unfortunately, it uses an inaccurate approximation of the difference of two log‐normal random variables. When the uncertainty on the effective isotropic radiated power used by the transmitter is high, the hyperbolic position bounding algorithm gives erroneous results. Thus, we propose new algorithms that rely either on better approximations or a geometric interpretation of the problem. We also evaluate the impacts of using multiple independent signals to detect the transmitter. Copyright © 2013 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it