MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2124717094 · doi:10.1109/tase.2011.2138135

Probabilistic Analysis and Correction of Chen's Tag Estimate Method

2011· article· en· W2124717094 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

VenueIEEE Transactions on Automation Science and Engineering · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicRFID technology advancements
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAlohaProbabilistic logicComputer scienceChenRadio-frequency identificationA priori and a posterioriWirelessStatistical modelMaximum a posteriori estimationAlgorithmThroughputMaximum likelihoodArtificial intelligenceTelecommunicationsStatisticsMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Radio frequency identification (RFID) is a ubiquitous wireless technology which allows objects to be identified automatically. An RFID tag is a small electronic device with an antenna and has a unique serial number. For some RFID applications and in the ALOHA-based anticollision algorithms, the number of tags in the system needs to be estimated. In Trans. Autom. Sci. Eng., vol 6, no. 1, pp. 9-15, Jan. 2009, Chen, a probabilistic method for tag estimation in ALOHA-based RFID systems was proposed, based on the maximum a posteriori probability. Although this approach is novel and useful, it has a mathematical error in modeling the problem. In this short paper, we address this problem and provide the correct probabilistic model for the ALOHA-based RFID systems. Some consequences of correcting the error in Trans. Autom. Sci. Eng., vol 6, no. 1, pp. 9-15, Jan. 2009, Chen, are discussed and the model is validated via simulation. Using the correct model, the performance of the ALOHA-based anticollision algorithm can be improved.

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)0.000
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 score0.655
Threshold uncertainty score0.389

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.254
Teacher spread0.241 · 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