MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2059794078 · doi:10.1109/lcn.2005.45

Data relaying with optimal resource management in wireless sensor networks

2005· article· en· W2059794078 on OpenAlexaff
Robert Benkoczi, Hossam S. Hassanein, Selim G. Akl, Sylvia Tai

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicEnergy Efficient Wireless Sensor Networks
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRelayComputer networkComputer scienceWireless sensor networkNetwork packetRelay channelBase stationNode (physics)WirelessKey distribution in wireless sensor networksSoftware deploymentDefault gatewayRouting (electronic design automation)Distributed computingWireless networkTelecommunicationsEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, the concern is with the management of data traffic after node deployment. To address some of the shortcomings of both single and multihop communication, this paper work with a hybrid model. The WSNet architecture is comprised of three classes of sensor nodes, sensors, relay nodes, and relay gateways. Sensors - gather and send data values to one relay nodes. Relay nodes - receive data values from sensors and/or other relay nodes and forward them to relay nodes or relay gateways. Relay gateways - receive data values from RN and send them directly (in one hop) to the base station, possibly using a dedicated channel. Our goal is to select paths along which data packets can be relayed until they reach one or more relay gateways while satisfying several constraints. These decisions take place at the application level, are computed by a central algorithm running at the base station, and rely on routing protocols to deliver the messages. A fixed topology of directly communicating nodes were assumed and a long term data communication plan based on knowing the amount of data generated by sensor nodes. The optimality of the solution obtained was guaranteed

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 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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.550
Threshold uncertainty score0.870

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0030.002
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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.236
Teacher spread0.217 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations3
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicEnergy Efficient Wireless Sensor NetworksFrench-language works237,207