MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2111600529 · doi:10.1109/tcomm.2010.05.090100

Coherent max-log decision fusion in wireless sensor networks

2010· article· en· W2111600529 on OpenAlexaff
Andre Lei, Robert Schober

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Communications · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicDistributed Sensor Networks and Detection Algorithms
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFusionFusion centerSensor fusionFusion rulesDecision ruleComputer scienceWireless sensor networkWirelessBinary numberAlgorithmData miningArtificial intelligenceMathematicsCognitive radioTelecommunicationsComputer networkImage fusion

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this letter, we revisit the problem of distributed coherent decision fusion for wireless sensor networks where the sensors make independent decisions on the hypothesis under test and forward their decisions over noisy fading channels to the fusion center. We propose a novel fusion rule which is obtained by applying the max-log approximation to the optimal fusion rule. Furthermore, we provide a unified performance analysis of binary decision fusion which is applicable to the optimal fusion rule and various suboptimal fusion rules such as the max-log, maximal ratio combining, equal gain combining, and Chair-Varshney fusion rules. Our results show that the proposed max-log fusion rule outperforms all previously proposed suboptimal fusion rules and has a close-to-optimal performance.

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.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.010
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.021

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.262
Teacher spread0.244 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations36
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on CommunicationsSame topicDistributed Sensor Networks and Detection AlgorithmsFrench-language works237,207