Directed position estimation: a recursive localization approach for wireless sensor networks
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
The establishment of a localization system is an important task in wireless sensor networks. Due to the geographical correlation of the sensed data, location information is commonly used to name the gathered data and address nodes and regions in data dissemination protocols. In general, to estimate its location, a node needs the position information of, at least, three reference points (neighbors that know their positions). In this work, we propose a different scheme in which only two reference points are required to estimate a position. To choose between the two possible solutions of an estimate, we use the known direction of the recursion. This approach leads to a recursive localization system that works with low density networks (increasing in 40% the number of nodes with estimates in some cases), reduces the position error in almost 30%, requires 37% less processor resources to estimate a position, uses less beacon nodes, and also indicates the node position error based on its distance to the recursion origin. No GPS-enabled node is required, as the recursion origin can be used as the relative coordinate system.
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 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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