Achieving Reliability Over Cluster-Based Wireless Sensor Networks Using Backup Cluster Heads
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Wireless Sensor Networks (WSN) are becoming a viable tool for many monitoring applications. These applications may be of critical nature where the transportation of the information of events from the region of interest to some base station is crucial, where the data loss can not be tolerated. In the cluster-based two-tier WSN, where cluster-head nodes gather data from sensors in their clusters and then transmit to base station, when cluster head nodes start to die, the coverage of those clusters is lost and it leaves the region unmonitored. Even if the cluster heads are rotated and reassigned after some time, until the next rotation that cluster in question will be out of cluster head and will lose coverage. A lot of information is lost which is sensed and sent by the sensor nodes of the cluster to the dead cluster head. We propose here to select backup cluster heads (BCHs), for those cluster heads which are close to deplete their energy. The cluster head, when about to die, sends an SOS with the gathered information until then, to the respective BCH which takes over the responsibility and continues to work as a new cluster head. To evaluate the effect and results of BCH we used LEACH-C protocol and compared the data loss ratio with and without a BCH.
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 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 | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".