MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2051257992 · doi:10.1109/sam.2012.6250552

Distributed posterior Cramér-Rao lower bound for nonlinear sequential Bayesian estimation

2012· article· en· W2051257992 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.

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicTarget Tracking and Data Fusion in Sensor Networks
Canadian institutionsYork University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceEstimatorFisher informationBayesian probabilityUpper and lower boundsAlgorithmWireless sensor networkSensor fusionMathematicsArtificial intelligenceComputer networkStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In distributed sensor networks, the posterior Cramér-Rao lower bound (PCRLB) has recently been used [1] as a selection criteria for sensor management decisions, where new sensor nodes are deployed or existing ones reactivated to optimize the network's performance. Previous algorithms to compute the PCRLB are derived for the centralized [2] and hierarchical architectures [3] using a fusion centre that makes them inappropriate for distributed sensor management. Only recently a suboptimal expression [1] for the distributed architecture has been proposed, which can at times lead to large errors especially in systems with highly non-linear dynamics. The paper derives the optimal PCRLB for the distributed architecture. In other words, we derive a recursive procedure to determine the overall Fisher information matrix (FIM), i.e., the inverse of the PCRLB, from local FIMs of the distributed estimators. The proposed distributed PCRLB is independent of the filtering mechanism used and closely follows its centralized counterpart.

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)0.000
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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.669
Threshold uncertainty score0.731

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 science0.0010.000
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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.288
Teacher spread0.262 · 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