MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2083799774 · doi:10.1109/icc.2012.6364936

Data collection using rendezvous points and mobile actor in wireless sensor networks

2012· article· en· W2083799774 on OpenAlexaff
Abdullah Alomari, Nauman Aslam, Frank Comeau

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicEnergy Efficient Wireless Sensor Networks
Canadian institutionsSt. Francis Xavier UniversityDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRendezvousWireless sensor networkComputer scienceTraverseBase stationComputer networkTravelling salesman problemData collectionKey distribution in wireless sensor networksNode (physics)Real-time computingWirelessHeuristicMobile computingMobile telephonySensor nodeData transmissionMobile radioWireless networkAlgorithmTelecommunicationsEngineeringMathematicsGeographyArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper we present a new data collection scheme using mobile actors in a large scale wireless sensor network (WSN). A mobile actor, or for convenience, M-actor is a mobile node that has powerful energy source, computation, and communication features. The mobile node is able to move freely through the sensor deployment, traversing through the radio transmission range of wireless sensor nodes to collect the sensed data. Once data from all sensors is collected, the M-actor returns to the base station to off-load the collected data. This paper makes two contributions. First, we present a heuristic to compute collection points, referred to as the rendezvous points (RPs). These points are computed such that full coverage is guaranteed. Second, the optimal path for the M-actor is modeled using a genetic algorithm (GA)based traveling salesman problem (TSP). The proposed scheme is evaluated through simulations. We demonstrate that the proposed scheme achieves significant improvement in reducing the tour length for the M-actor when compared with other schemes.

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: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.376
Threshold uncertainty score0.707

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 science0.0010.001
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 head0.041
GPT teacher head0.276
Teacher spread0.235 · 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
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations5
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicEnergy Efficient Wireless Sensor NetworksFrench-language works237,207