MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2095449867 · doi:10.1145/1143549.1143786

On the robustness of grid-based deployment in wireless sensor networks

2006· article· en· W2095449867 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
FieldComputer Science
TopicEnergy Efficient Wireless Sensor Networks
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSoftware deploymentWireless sensor networkComputer scienceRobustness (evolution)GridProvisioningReal-time computingDistributed computingWirelessComputer networkTelecommunicationsMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Grid-based sensor deployment is an effective and efficient practice for provisioning wireless sensor networks. Previous work has addressed grid-based deployment of sensors in order to guarantee sensing coverage under the assumption that each device can be placed exactly at the grid vertices. However, in reality, the accuracy of device placement may be subject to various errors, which are shown to impair the sensing coverage. To overcome the negative impacts of these errors, the grid resolution and the number of devices to be deployed should be re-evaluated. In this paper, two deployment errors are identified, namely, misalignment and random errors. We derive the minimum number of sensors required by a robust grid-based sensor deployment assuming that the errors are bounded. This research shows that when designing a realistic large-scale grid-based sensor deployment, errors in device placement must be taken into account.

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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.563
Threshold uncertainty score0.545

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 science0.0010.000
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 head0.198
Teacher spread0.189 · 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

Citations81
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicEnergy Efficient Wireless Sensor NetworksFrench-language works237,207