Distributed cooperative localization in wireless sensor networks without NLOS identification
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this paper, a 2-stage robust distributed algorithm is proposed for cooperative sensor network localization using time of arrival (TOA) data without identification of non-line of sight (NLOS) links. In the first stage, to overcome the effect of outliers, a convex relaxation of the Huber loss function is applied so that by using iterative optimization techniques, good estimates of the true sensor locations can be obtained. In the second stage, the original (non-relaxed) Huber cost function is further optimized to obtain refined location estimates based on those obtained in the first stage. In both stages, a simple gradient descent technique is used to carry out the optimization. Through simulations and real data analysis, it is shown that the proposed convex relaxation generally achieves a lower root mean squared error (RMSE) compared to other convex relaxation techniques in the literature. Also by doing the second stage, the position estimates are improved and we can achieve an RMSE close to that of the other distributed algorithms which know a priori which links are in NLOS.
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 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".