MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2116741969 · doi:10.1109/icassp.2004.1326692

Evaluating average causal effect using wireless sensor networks

2004· article· en· W2116741969 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
TopicDistributed Sensor Networks and Detection Algorithms
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceWireless sensor networkSimple (philosophy)Network topologyWirelessMessage passingTree (set theory)Distributed computingTheoretical computer scienceComputer networkTopology (electrical circuits)MathematicsTelecommunications

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Sensor networks have exciting potential applications in agriculture and medicine, where after the application of treatment, it is beneficial not merely to track the response but to assess the causal impact of the treatment reception. We describe a distributed algorithm for the evaluation of the average causal effect of treatment reception upon response. Our procedure applies the expectation-maximization algorithm across a graphical model of the system, using local message-passing techniques. The key collaborative step in the algorithm is simple message aggregation and averaging, which we perform over a tree network topology. Finally, for completeness purposes, we describe a simple framework for the construction and maintenance of the tree topology that provides a robust mechanism for executing the algorithm using spread-spectrum or ultra-wideband communication.

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 score0.744
Threshold uncertainty score0.723

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)0.0000.000

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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.303
Teacher spread0.274 · 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