MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2146929559 · doi:10.1109/icc.2006.255231

Analysis of Different Sleep and Wakeup Strategies in Solar Powered Wireless Sensor Networks

2006· article· en· W2146929559 on OpenAlexaff
Dusit Niyato, Ekram Hossain, Afshin Fallahi

Bibliographic record

Venue2006 IEEE International Conference on Communications · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicEnergy Harvesting in Wireless Networks
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceNetwork packetNode (physics)Wireless sensor networkBattery (electricity)Markov chainReal-time computingComputer networkMarkov processEngineeringMathematicsPower (physics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We present a novel analytical framework to investigate the performances of different sleeping strategies in a wireless sensor network where a solar cell is used to charge the battery in a sensor node. While the energy generation process (i.e., solar radiation) in a solar cell is modeled by a stochastic process (i.e., a Markov chain), a linear battery model with relaxation effect is used for the battery capacity recovery process. Average queue length, packet dropping and packet blocking probabilities and packet delay distribution at each node are the major performance metrics. Developed based on a multi-dimensional discrete-time Markov chain, the presented model can be used to analyze the performances of different sleep and wakeup strategies at each node (e.g., strategies based on available battery capacity, channel state, solar radiation condition and queue length, and hybrid of these conditions). The numerical results obtained from the analytical model are validated by extensive simulations. The presented model would be useful for designing and optimizing sleeping strategies in a solar powered sensor network under energy and QoS constraints.

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.

How this classification was reachedexpand

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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.098
Threshold uncertainty score0.788

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.271
Teacher spread0.243 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations8
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venue2006 IEEE International Conference on CommunicationsSame topicEnergy Harvesting in Wireless NetworksFrench-language works237,207