MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2100937320 · doi:10.5555/1995456.1995889

Simulation of large wireless sensor networks using Cell-DEVS

2009· article· en· W2100937320 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

VenueWinter Simulation Conference · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicSimulation Techniques and Applications
Canadian institutionsCarleton UniversityUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWireless sensor networkDEVSComputer scienceKey distribution in wireless sensor networksMobile wireless sensor networkWirelessWireless ad hoc networkFormalism (music)Computer networkTopology controlDistributed computingWireless networkReal-time computingEmbedded systemModeling and simulationSimulationTelecommunications

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The advancement of electronic sensing devices, microcomputers and wireless communication devices has lead to creation of new smart sensors, which can monitor actuate, compute and communicate. Typically, these sensors are deployed in non-deterministic mode (randomly) when deployed in large numbers. These sensor devices have the capability to self-organize into the so-called Wireless Sensor Networks (WSN). WSN are ad-hoc networks, consisting of these spatially distributed sensing and processing devices. We introduce a model and a simulation study of these Large Wireless Sensor Networks (WSN) by implementing the Topology Control Algorithm. We use the Cell-DEVS formalism, which enables efficient execution of cellular models. Thereafter, we observe and evaluate the behavior of sensor nodes and entire WSN from the simulation results obtained, under different test scenarios.

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 score0.734
Threshold uncertainty score0.726

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 communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.140
GPT teacher head0.431
Teacher spread0.291 · 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