MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2019669823 · doi:10.1109/cdc.2013.6760993

Efficient computation of sensor activation decisions in discrete-event systems

2013· article· en· W2019669823 on OpenAlexafffund
David Sears, Karen Rudie

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicPetri Nets in System Modeling
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsComputer scienceEvent (particle physics)TrajectoryGeneralityComputationTask (project management)Real-time computingAlgorithmEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper considers partially-observed discrete-event systems where sensors are associated with events observable to an agent monitoring the system. The agent is capable of turning the sensors for events on and off dynamically, depending on the trajectory of the system. Reading data from the sensors may be costly so it is imperative that their use be reduced for reasons such as energy, bandwidth or security. When a sensor for an event is on / active any occurrence of the event is detected by the agent and is not detected otherwise. The agent may employ different sensor activation policies, depending on the task at hand. Sensor activation policies are defined over the transitions of a state-transition representation of the system. From sensor activation policies a map from observed event sequences to sensor activation decisions can be computed which the agent can use to determine which sensors to turn on / off and when. In this paper, we consider two subclasses of sensor activation policies of increasing generality. For each subclass, we demonstrate ways to compute maps from observed event sequences to sensor activation decisions in polynomial time.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.017

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.285
Teacher spread0.255 · 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 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

Citations11
Published2013
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicPetri Nets in System ModelingFrench-language works237,207