Data extraction from wireless sensor networks using distributed fountain codes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A Wireless Sensor Network (WSN) observes a natural field and aims to recreate it with sufficient fidelity at a, perhaps distant, Fusion Center (FC) using a wireless communication channel of arbitrary capacity. We propose a universal and power efficient method for such data extraction, based on Digital Fountain Codes (DFCs) and joint-source channel decoding. Our method implements a distributed `rate-lessiquest DFC which automatically tunes the number of transmissions to the channel capacity. Furthermore, instead of directly compressing the WSN data, we achieve rate reduction by treating the spatiotemporal dependencies in the field as an outer code, and jointly decoding this concatenation at the FC using a multi-stage iterative decoder. We demonstrate that a power efficiency close to the capacity-rate-distortion limit is achieved at moderate distortion levels, irrespective of the channel capacity or field dependencies. As compared to the traditional approach of source-channel separation, the proposed data extraction scheme is particularly attractive for WSN applications due its computationally simple encoding procedure, low latency and the ability to seamlessly trade-off fidelity of reconstruction for power consumption.
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| 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".