AZR-LEACH: An Energy Efficient Routing Protocol for Wireless Sensor Networks
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
Reducing the energy consumption of available resources is still a problem to be solved in Wireless Sensor Networks (WSNs). Many types of existing routing protocols are developed to save power consumption. In these protocols, cluster-based routing protocols are found to be more energy efficient. A cluster head is selected to aggregate the data received from root nodes and forwards these data to the base station in cluster-based routing. The selection of cluster heads should be efficient to save energy. In our proposed protocol, we use static clustering for the efficient selection of cluster heads. The proposed routing protocol works efficiently in large as well as small areas. For an optimal number of cluster head selection we divide a large sensor field into rectangular clusters. Then these rectangular clusters are further grouped into zones for efficient communication between cluster heads and a base station. We perform MATLAB simulations to observe the network stability, throughput, energy consumption, network lifetime and the number of cluster heads. Our proposed routing protocol outperforms in large areas in comparison with the LEACH, MH-LEACH, and SEP routing protocols.
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 | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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