Relay node deployment strategies in heterogeneous wireless sensor networks: multiple-hop communication case
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
While a lot of existing research attempts to extend the lifetime of a wireless sensor network (WSN) by designing energy efficient networking protocols, the impact of random device deployment on system lifetime is not stressed enough. Some research efforts have tried to optimize device deployment with respect to lifetime by assuming devices can be placed deliberately. However, the methodologies and solutions therein are not applicable to a randomly deployed large scale WSN. In this research, we propose three random deployment strategies for relay nodes in a heterogeneous WSN, namely, connectivity- oriented, lifetime-oriented and hybrid deployment. We investigate how a strategy can affect both connectivity and network lifetime of a multi-hop heterogeneous WSN, in which relay nodes transmit data to the base station via multi-hop relay. The performance of the three strategies is evaluated through simulations. The results of this research provide a viable solution to the problem of optimizing provisioning of a large scale heterogeneous WSN.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it