MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2096437618 · doi:10.1142/s0219265902000513

STATION LAYOUTS IN THE PRESENCE OF LOCATION CONSTRAINTS

2002· article· en· W2096437618 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.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Interconnection Networks · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicComputational Geometry and Mesh Generation
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
FundersMitacs
KeywordsCenter (category theory)Base stationRADIUSPoint (geometry)PlanarTotal stationComputer scienceSIGNAL (programming language)Cover (algebra)WirelessTelecommunicationsMetro stationElectrical engineeringComputer networkGeodesyGeometryGeographyMathematicsEngineeringComputer graphics (images)Transport engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In wireless communication, the signal of a typical broadcast station is transmitted from a broadcast center p and reaches objects at a distance, say, r from it. In addition there is a radius r 0 , r 0 < r, such that the signal originating from the center of the station is so strong that human habitation within distance r 0 from the center p should be avoided. In other words, points within distance r 0 from the station comprise a hazardous zone. We consider the following station layout proble: Cover a given planar region that includes a collection of buildings with a minimum number of stations so that every point in the region is within the reach of a station, while at the same time no interior point of any building is within the hazardous zone of a station. We give algorithms for computing such station layouts in both the one- and two-dimensional cases.

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)0.001
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.913
Threshold uncertainty score0.169

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 science0.0000.000
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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.247
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