MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1998914666 · doi:10.1504/ijsnet.2008.019252

Efficient aggregation using first hop selection in WSNs

2008· article· en· W1998914666 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Sensor Networks · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicEnergy Efficient Wireless Sensor Networks
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsComputer scienceHeuristicsWireless sensor networkData aggregatorOverhead (engineering)Flow networkInteger programmingComputer networkDistributed computingMathematical optimizationAlgorithmMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We study the approaches to extending the lifetime of Wireless Sensor Networks (WSNs) based on in-network data aggregation at the First Hop (FH) away from each sensor data source, followed by flow-based routing of the resulting traffic. We introduce the concept of flow loss multiplier to express the impact of data aggregation on the conveyed data. A Mixed Integer Linear Programming (MILP) model is formulated for the problem of determining the optimal FH aggregation nodes that maximise network lifetime. Heuristics are proposed to obtain significant aggregation and to prolong the system lifetime. To facilitate performance evaluation, we adopt a flow loss multiplier that depends on the spatial relationship among sensed areas. Simulation results show that FH aggregation provides significant increase in network lifetime for both flow-based and tree-based delivery schemes, and that flow-based mechanisms provide better network lifetime than tree-based mechanisms but at the cost of added complexity and overhead.

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 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 score0.453
Threshold uncertainty score0.733

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.244
Teacher spread0.226 · 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