Adaptive Time Synchronization for Wireless Sensor Networks with Self-Calibration
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
Time synchronization is important for wireless sensor networks because it facilitates cooperation among nodes and helps raise power efficiency. Time synchronization protocols like TPSN, RBS and FTSP have provided great schemes to fulfill fast synchronization with efficiency. In some applications, nodes might hope to sleep for a long time without timestamp exchanges with other nodes. In that case, accurate time drift prediction is quite necessary. For that purpose, firstly, we propose a time synchronization scheme, which fully utilizes the broadcast nature. The scheme achieves time synchronization with fewer timestamps compared with RBS and TPSN. Secondly, we introduce a method to find relative time drift rate on the fly. Thirdly, we introduce a scheme to predict time drift rates of the next few hours. We also analyze a few factors that deteriorate frequency drift or time drift rate. The diurnal periodical environment trend, instead of mathematical extrapolation, is used for time drift rates prediction of the next few hours.
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 | 0.000 | 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