MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1986454539 · doi:10.1109/icc.2010.5502428

Energy-Efficient Parallel Singulation in RFID

2010· article· en· W1986454539 on OpenAlexaff
Kashif Ali, Sharief Oteafy, Hossam S. Hassanein

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicRFID technology advancements
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInefficiencyComputer scienceOverhead (engineering)Radio-frequency identificationEfficient energy useEnergy consumptionReading (process)Cluster (spacecraft)Energy (signal processing)Process (computing)Embedded systemParallel computingEngineeringComputer networkElectrical engineeringOperating system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Tag collisions impose a significant hindrance to reading rates of Radio Frequency Identification systems. The parallel singulation approach, being a major milestone, clusters tags and autonomously interrogates each cluster in parallel. This technique reduces the number of tags being interrogated at a given time, reducing collisions, and achieves higher reading rates. However, such an approach faces two limitations as the number of clusters increase. The exponential increase in tag responses may hinder tag functionality due to energy spent on communication. Moreover, energy inefficiency is incurred at cluster-heads to process significantly more tag responses. These issues overshadow the promising benefits of employing parallel singulation. In this paper, we remedy such hindrances by proposing energy efficient enhancements to the parallel singulation technique. The essence of these enhancements lies in minimizing an important measure of communication overhead, referred to as tags traffic rate, which indicates the efficiency of interrogation cycles in communicating with all tags without incurring unnecessary overhead. Analyses carried out via simulation demonstrate significant improvements by the proposed schemes in reducing energy consumption of cluster-heads, without posing constraints on tag operations nor incurring significant degradation of reading rates.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.205
Threshold uncertainty score0.227

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.004
GPT teacher head0.197
Teacher spread0.193 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations1
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicRFID technology advancementsFrench-language works237,207