MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1971585841 · doi:10.1109/cdc.2014.7039519

On the optimal thresholds in remote state estimation with communication costs

2014· article· en· W1971585841 on OpenAlexaff
Jhelum Chakravorty, Aditya Mahajan

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicDistributed Sensor Networks and Detection Algorithms
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEstimatorComputer scienceMarkov processMarkov decision processMarkov chainKalman filterMathematical optimizationFunction (biology)State (computer science)Optimal estimationMathematicsAlgorithmArtificial intelligenceStatisticsMachine learning

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, we consider a remote sensing system that consists of a sensor and an estimator. A sensor observes a first order Markov source and must communicate it to a remote estimator. Communication is noiseless but expensive. At each time, based on the history of its observations and decisions, the sensor chooses whether to transmit or not. If the sensor does not transmit, then the estimator must estimate the Markov process using its past observations. It was shown by Lipsa and Martins, 2011 and by Nayyar et al, 2013 that the optimal strategy has the following structure. The optimal estimation strategy is Kalman-like and the optimal communication strategy is to communicate when the estimation error is greater than a threshold. We derive closed form expressions for infinite horizon discounted cost version of the problem. Our solution approach is inspired by the idea of calibration used in multi-armed bandits. We identify the value of the communication cost for which one is indifferent between two consecutive threshold based strategies. Using these values, we characterize the optimal thresholds as a function of the communication cost. Lastly, we present an example of birth-death Markov chain to illustrate our results.

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)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.053
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.037

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.053
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0020.006
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0030.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.008
GPT teacher head0.221
Teacher spread0.213 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations10
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicDistributed Sensor Networks and Detection AlgorithmsFrench-language works237,207