MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2031264979 · doi:10.1109/iccnc.2014.6785394

Wireless Sensor Network-based air quality monitoring system

2014· article· en· W2031264979 on OpenAlexaff
Samer Mansour, Nidal Nasser, Lutful Karim, Asmaa Ali

Bibliographic record

Venue2014 International Conference on Computing, Networking and Communications (ICNC) · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicEnergy Efficient Wireless Sensor Networks
Canadian institutionsUniversity of GuelphSeneca Polytechnic
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWireless sensor networkComputer scienceComputer networkProtocol (science)Key distribution in wireless sensor networksEnergy consumptionReal-time computingWireless networkCluster analysisEmbedded systemWirelessTelecommunicationsEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper proposes a simple Wireless Sensor Network (WSN)-based air quality monitoring system (WSN-AQMS) for industrial and urban areas. The proposed framework comprises a set of gas sensors (ozone, CO, and NO2) that are deployed on stacks and infrastructure of a Zigbee WSN and a central server to support both short-term real-time incident management and a long-term strategic planning. This architecture would use open-hardware open-software gas sensing capable motes [6] made by Libelium. These motes use the ZigBee communication protocol and provide a real-time low cost monitoring system through the use of low cost, low data rate, and low power wireless communication technology. The proposed monitoring system can be transferred to or shared by other applications. We also introduce a simple but efficient clustering protocol dubbed hereafter “Clustering Protocol for Air Sensor network” (CPAS) for the proposed WSN-AQMS framework. CPAS proves to be efficient in terms of network energy consumption, network lifetime, and the rate at which data is communicated.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.002

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 head0.057
GPT teacher head0.307
Teacher spread0.250 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations97
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venue2014 International Conference on Computing, Networking and Communications (ICNC)Same topicEnergy Efficient Wireless Sensor NetworksFrench-language works237,207