Delay calculation and error compensation in TBCD-TDM communication protocol for Wireless Body 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
Implantable sensor network becomes nowadays an important area of research. Sensors are implanted inside the patient body to measure its physiological changes and send them wirelessly to an external close-by device. Such network is called IWBSN (Implantable Wireless Body Sensor Network). The life time of the embedded batteries associated with these tiny sensor nodes is too short. Hence power consumption is the most important design metrics associated with these sensors. A novel ultra low energy communication protocol has been proposed to address the life time of the battery within the sensor. Our proposed protocol is based on time synchronization between all sensor nodes and the base station, where the delay of the wireless signal propagation is very critical. Tracking of the time synchronization using the standard algorithms is very costly energy-wise. In this paper, we propose a technique which automatically calculates the delay (sensor-node to Base-station) and compensates for any discrepancies. This correction is done while saving the tiny energy resources inside the sensor nodes. Our proposed solution has been tested wirelessly through transceiver boards using a single FPGA board. The experimental results have shown the correctness of our protocol along with the delay correction technique.
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