MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2162230726 · doi:10.1109/ssdbm.2006.21

Efficient Data Harvesting for Tracing Phenomena in Sensor Networks

2006· article· en· W2162230726 on OpenAlexaff
Adesola Omotayo, Moustafa A. Hammad, Ken Barker

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicEnergy Efficient Wireless Sensor Networks
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWireless sensor networkComputer scienceOverhead (engineering)PublicationVisual sensor networkComputer networkTracingDistributed computingKey distribution in wireless sensor networksRouting (electronic design automation)Object (grammar)Real-time computingWireless networkWirelessTelecommunications

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Many publish/subscribe systems have been built using wireless sensor networks, WSNs, deployed for real-world environmental data collection, security monitoring, and object tracking. However, research efforts on WSN-based publish/subscribe systems have largely focused on routing algorithms leaving data management issues mostly untouched. This paper considers a publish/subscribe system built on top of a sensor network that monitors the occurrences of phenomena. In quest for explanations to the occurrence of a phenomenon, a subscriber poses one-time queries to the sensor network for sensor readings taken seconds or minutes before the reported phenomenon occurred. These types of queries cannot be satisfied by subscriptions since subscriptions are only effective in delivering streams of new phenomena. To efficiently answer such queries, it is imperative that a data farm of sensor readings be cultivated within WSNs. This paper proposes a new algorithm for archiving sensor readings on data farm that leverages the non-volatile memory of sensor nodes in the network. The proposed algorithm takes advantage of the memory space on nodes that have low probabilities of detecting phenomena. By running an extensive set of simulation experiments, the performance results show that the proposed algorithm can provide 32.9% memory gain and 81.8% low communication overhead when compared to an approach in which nodes use only their own physical memory

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.245
Teacher spread0.218 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations6
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicEnergy Efficient Wireless Sensor NetworksFrench-language works237,207