MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2032161112 · doi:10.1109/tsp.2013.2239992

Multiscale Gossip for Efficient Decentralized Averaging in Wireless Packet Networks

2013· article· en· W2032161112 on OpenAlexaff
Konstantinos I. Tsianos, Michael Rabbat

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Signal Processing · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicDistributed Control Multi-Agent Systems
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
FundersKempe Foundation
KeywordsGossipComputer scienceHierarchyKey (lock)Theoretical computer scienceAlgorithmArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper describes and analyzes a hierarchical algorithm called Multiscale Gossip for solving the distributed average consensus problem in wireless sensor networks. The algorithm proceeds by recursively partitioning a given network. Initially, nodes at the finest scale gossip to compute local averages. Then, using multi-hop communication and geographic routing to communicate between nodes that are not directly connected, these local averages are progressively fused up the hierarchy until the global average is computed. We show that the proposed hierarchical scheme withk=Θ(loglogn) levels of hierarchy is competitive with state-of-the-art randomized gossip algorithms in terms of message complexity, achieving ε-accuracy with high probability afterO(nloglognlog[1/(ε)] ) single-hop messages. Key to our analysis is the way in which the network is recursively partitioned. We find that the above scaling law is achieved when subnetworks at scalejcontainO(n(2/3)j) nodes; then the message complexity at any individual scale isO(nlog[1/ε]). Another important consequence of the hierarchical construction is that the longest distance over which messages are exchanged isO(n1/3) hops (at the highest scale), and most messages (at lower scales) travel shorter distances. In networks that use link-level acknowledgements, this results in less congestion and resource usage by reducing message retransmissions. Simulations illustrate that the proposed scheme is more efficient than state-of-the-art randomized gossip algorithms based on averaging along paths.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.244
Teacher spread0.228 · 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

Citations6
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Signal ProcessingSame topicDistributed Control Multi-Agent SystemsFrench-language works237,207