MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2054562163 · doi:10.1109/smc.2014.6974030

Source-reliability-adaptive distributed information fusion

2014· article· en· W2054562163 on OpenAlexaff
Sepideh Seifzadeh, Bahador Khaleghi, Fakhri Karray

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicTarget Tracking and Data Fusion in Sensor Networks
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceParticle filterWireless sensor networkRobustness (evolution)Soft sensorSensor fusionScalabilityDistributed computingReliability (semiconductor)Real-time computingSensor nodeNode (physics)Kalman filterProcess (computing)Key distribution in wireless sensor networksEngineeringArtificial intelligenceWirelessWireless network

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A source-reliability-adaptive distributed non-linear estimation method based on distributed Soft-Data-Constrained Multi-Model Particle Filtering (SDCMMPF) and applicable to a number of distributed state estimation problems is proposed. The proposed method requires only local data exchange among neighbouring sensor nodes, it therefore provides enhanced reliability, scalability, and ease of deployment. In particular, by taking into account the estimate reliability of each sensor node at any point in time, it yields a more robust distributed estimation. To perform the Multi-Model Particle Filtering (MMPF) in an adaptive distributed manner, a Gaussian approximation of the particle cloud obtained at each sensor node along with a weighted Consensus Propagation (CP) based distributed data aggregation scheme are deployed to dynamically re-weight the particles' weights. The filtering approach in this paper is a soft-data constrained variant of the multi-model particle filter presented in our earlier work, and is capable of processing both soft human-generated data and conventional hard sensory data. In case of permanent noise in the estimation provided by a sensor node, due to either a faulty sensing device or misleading soft data, the contribution of that node in the weighted consensus process is immediately reduced in order to alleviate its effect on the estimation provided by the neighbouring nodes and the entire network. The robustness of the proposed method is demonstrated through simulation results for an agile target tracking task.

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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

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 studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0020.002
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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.198
Teacher spread0.191 · 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
GenreMethods

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

Citations0
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicTarget Tracking and Data Fusion in Sensor NetworksFrench-language works237,207