Uncertain Data Clustering-Based Distance Estimation in 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
For communication distance estimations in Wireless Sensor Networks (WSNs), the RSSI (Received Signal Strength Indicator) value is usually assumed to have a linear relationship with the logarithm of the communication distance. However, this is not always true in reality because there are always uncertainties in RSSI readings due to obstacles, wireless interferences, etc. In this paper, we specifically propose a novel RSSI-based communication distance estimation method based on the idea of interval data clustering. We first use interval data, combined with statistical information of RSSI values, to interpret the distribution characteristics of RSSI. We then use interval data hard clustering and soft clustering to overcome different levels of RSSI uncertainties, respectively. We have used real RSSI measurements to evaluate our communication distance estimation method in three representative wireless environments. Extensive experimental results show that our communication distance estimation method can effectively achieve promising estimation accuracy with high efficiency when compared to other state-of-art approaches.
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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 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