MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2068862620 · doi:10.1109/smc.2014.6973877

Marine environment monitoring using Wireless Sensor Networks: A systematic review

2014· review· en· W2068862620 on OpenAlexaff
Xu Guobao, Weiming Shen, Xianbin Wang

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typereview
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicEnergy Efficient Wireless Sensor Networks
Canadian institutionsWestern University
FundersGuangdong Ocean University
KeywordsSoftware deploymentWireless sensor networkComputer scienceArchitectureEnvironmental monitoringSystems engineeringWirelessNode (physics)Real-time computingEngineeringTelecommunicationsComputer networkSoftware engineeringGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

During the past decade, marine environment monitoring has attracted more and more researchers around the world and various marine environment monitoring systems have been developed. Traditionally, an oceanographic research vessel is used to monitor marine environments, which is very expensive and time-consuming and has a low resolution both in time and space. Wireless Sensor Networks (WSNs) have recently been considered as a promising solution for this purpose since they have a number of advantages such as easy deployment, unmanned operation, real-time monitoring, and relatively low cost. This paper first describes a common architecture of WSN-based oceanographic monitoring systems and a general architecture of an oceanographic sensor node. Then, it presents a detailed review of some related projects, systems, and technologies. It also highlights major challenges and research opportunities on the development and deployment of wireless sensor networks for marine environment monitoring.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0080.008
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.282
Teacher spread0.248 · 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 designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations15
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicEnergy Efficient Wireless Sensor NetworksFrench-language works237,207