MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2088251771 · doi:10.1142/s1793830909000245

DISTRIBUTED ENERGY-EFFICIENT ALGORITHMS FOR COVERAGE PROBLEM IN ADJUSTABLE SENSING RANGES WIRELESS SENSOR NETWORKS

2009· article· en· W2088251771 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

VenueDiscrete Mathematics Algorithms and Applications · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicEnergy Efficient Wireless Sensor Networks
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWireless sensor networkComputer scienceAlgorithmScheduling (production processes)Energy consumptionRange (aeronautics)Efficient energy useSet cover problemReal-time computingDistributed computingSet (abstract data type)Mathematical optimizationComputer networkMathematicsEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Due to wide range of applications of Wireless Sensor Network (WSN), lots of effort has been dedicated to solve its various issues. Among those issues, coverage is one of the most fundamental ones of which a WSN has to watch over the environment such as a forest (area coverage) or set of subjects such as collection of precious renaissance paintings (target of point coverage) and collect environment parameters and maybe, further monitor the environment. With variable sensing range, the difficulties to cover a continuous space (where number of points is infinity) in the area coverage problem becomes somewhat harder than covering limited number of discrete points in the target coverage problem. Very few papers have paid effort for the former problem. In this paper, we consider the area coverage problem for WSN where sensors can arbitrarily change their sensing ranges under some upper bound. We first improve the work in [1] so that the boundary effect is ruled out and the monitored area can be completely covered at all cases. Next, we extend that improved algorithm by introducing two distributed scheduling algorithms which are trade-off in term of network lifetime and algorithms efficiency. The major objective of each of our 3 proposed algorithms in this paper is to balance energy consumption and to maximize network lifetime. Our proposed algorithm efficiency is shown by algorithms complexity analysis and extensive simulation. In compared with the work in [1], our proposed algorithms are not only better in providing coverage quality, they could also greatly lengthen network lifetime and greatly reduce the unnecessary coverage redundancy.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.397
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.241
Teacher spread0.229 · 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