MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2148964362 · doi:10.1109/twc.2010.04.090066

Distributed channel selection and randomized interrogation algorithms for large-scale and dense RFID systems

2010· article· en· W2148964362 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 Wireless Communications · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicRFID technology advancements
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceInterrogationCorrectnessRadio-frequency identificationAlgorithmChannel (broadcasting)WirelessHeuristicCollisionSelection algorithmCollision problemNetwork packetSelection (genetic algorithm)Distributed algorithmDistributed computingReal-time computingComputer networkTelecommunicationsArtificial intelligenceComputer security

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Radio frequency identification (RFID) is an emerging wireless communication technology which allows objects to be identified automatically. An RFID system consists of a set of readers and several objects, equipped with small and inexpensive computer chips, called tags. In a dense RFID system, where several readers are placed together to improve the read rate and correctness, readers and tags can frequently experience packet collision. High probability of collision impairs the benefit of multiple reader deployment and results in misreading. A common approach to avoid collision is to use a distinct frequency channel for interrogation for each reader. Various multi-channel anti-collision protocols have been proposed for RFID readers. However, due to their heuristic nature, most algorithms may not achieve optimal system performance. In this paper, we systematically design two optimization-based distributed channel selection and randomized interrogation algorithms for dense RFID systems. For this purpose, we develop elaborate models for the reader-to-tag and reader-to-reader collision problems. The first algorithm is fully distributed and is guaranteed to find a local optimum of a max-min fair resource allocation problem for RFID systems. The second algorithm is semi-distributed and achieves the global optimal system performance. Max-min fair optimality balances the performance and the processing load among readers. Simulation results show that our algorithms have significantly better performance than the previous heuristic algorithms.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.831
Threshold uncertainty score0.721

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 science0.0000.000
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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.255
Teacher spread0.242 · 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