MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2089144876 · doi:10.1504/ijaacs.2014.058014

CCA-MAP and iCCA-MAP: stationary and mobile WSN localisation algorithms

2013· article· en· W2089144876 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

VenueInternational Journal of Autonomous and Adaptive Communications Systems · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicIndoor and Outdoor Localization Technologies
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceTestbedWireless sensor networkAlgorithmNode (physics)Real-time computingComputer network

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Wireless Sensor Networks (WSNs) are usually randomly deployed in a region of interest. As a result, algorithms that can determine the location of sensor nodes within a WSN are of great importance. In recent years, several localisation algorithms have been proposed for stationary WSNs. Due to the growing number of applications requiring mobility, algorithms for localising mobile WSNs have also gained much interest as of late. In this paper, we present our recent works on localisation algorithms for WSNs. An algorithm for mobile WSNs, which extends the stationary CCA-MAP algorithm, is presented. The algorithm, called iCCA-MAP, applies an iterative and efficient nonlinear data mapping technique in order to localise the position of a mobile node within a WSN. Simulations detailing the performance of iCCA-MAP are outlined and discussed. We also describe the implementation of the CCA-MAP localisation algorithm on a real WSN testbed. Most localisation algorithms that have been proposed only provide simulation results and have never been implemented on a real testbed. The results obtained show that the implementation results are consistent with the simulation results.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.769
Threshold uncertainty score0.487

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 communication0.0000.001
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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.239
Teacher spread0.225 · 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