MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2087903459 · doi:10.1109/icc.2013.6654773

Distributed algorithms for the RFID coverage problem

2013· article· en· W2087903459 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicRFID technology advancements
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceGreedy algorithmSet cover problemCover (algebra)AlgorithmDistributed algorithmRandomized algorithmSet (abstract data type)Random accessApproximation algorithmTheoretical computer scienceDistributed computing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We introduce distributed algorithms for the RFID coverage problem, which is defined as finding the minimum amount of RFID readers that cover every tag. The algorithms depends on rounds of writes and reads in/from the tags' memories. The first algorithm, called Greedy Distributed Elimination (GDE), is inspired of, and equivalent to, the greedy approximation algorithm of the set cover problem. Our second contribution is a randomized algorithm that can run in one or more write/read rounds (called RANDOM and RANDOM+). Using concepts concluded from these algorithms, we introduce algorithm GDE-RANDOM+ which improves further the number of non-redundant readers of GDE by integrating it with RAN-DOM+.

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 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)0.000
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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.959
Threshold uncertainty score0.249

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.216
Teacher spread0.207 · 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

Quick stats

Citations8
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicRFID technology advancementsFrench-language works237,207