Power-Efficient Data Propagation Protocols for Wireless Sensor Networks
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Wireless sensor networks are composed of a vast number of ultra-small, fully autonomous computing, communication, and sensing devices, with very restricted energy and computing capabilities, that cooperate to accomplish a large sensing task. Such networks can be very useful in practice. The authors propose extended versions of two data propagation protocols: the Sleep-Awake Probabilistic Forwarding (SW-PFR) protocol and the Hierarchical Threshold-Sensitive Energy-Efficient Network (H-TEEN) protocol. These nontrivial extensions aim at improving the performance of the original protocols by introducing sleep-awake periods in the PFR case to save energy and introducing a hierarchy of clustering in the TEEN case to better cope with large network areas. The authors implemented the two protocols and performed an extensive comparison via simulation of various important measures of their performance with a focus on energy consumption. Data propagation under this approach exhibits high fault tolerance and increases network lifetime.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it