MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2027562628 · doi:10.1109/aina.2007.11

A Distributed and Dynamic Data Gathering Protocol for Sensor Networks

2007· article· en· W2027562628 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

VenueProceedings · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicEnergy Efficient Wireless Sensor Networks
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaTürkiye Bilimsel ve Teknolojik Araştırma Kurumu
KeywordsComputer scienceWireless sensor networkSink (geography)Distributed computingComputer networkRouting protocolData aggregatorSpanning treeData collectionConnected dominating setMinimum spanning treeTree (set theory)Routing (electronic design automation)AlgorithmMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper we propose a distributed, self organizing, robust and energy efficient data gathering algorithm for sensor networks operating in environments where all the sensor nodes are not in direct communication range of each other and data aggregation is used while routing. Proposed algorithm is based on local minimum spanning tree (LMST) structure, which nodes can construct from the position of their 1-hop neighbors. Reporting tree is constructed from the sink by allowing only edges of LMST to join the tree, plus possibly some direct links to the sink. Each node selects as parent the LMST neighbor so that the total energy cost of route to the sink is minimal. We also describe route maintenance protocols to respond to predicted sensor failures and addition of new sensors. Our simulation results show that our algorithm prolongs the network lifetime significantly compared to some alternative schemes.

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)0.001
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.903
Threshold uncertainty score0.717

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.001
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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.307
Teacher spread0.277 · 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