MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2165233025 · doi:10.1109/mnet.2008.4519963

The need for access point power saving in solar powered WLAN mesh networks

2008· article· en· W2165233025 on OpenAlexaff
T.D. Todd, Amir A. Sayegh, Mohammad AL-Smadi, Dongmei Zhao

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Network · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicEnergy Harvesting in Wireless Networks
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceComputer networkWireless mesh networkMesh networkingNode (physics)ProvisioningFlexibility (engineering)TelecommunicationsIEEE 802.11sWireless networkWirelessEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Wireless LAN mesh networks are now being used to deploy Wi-Fi coverage in a wide variety of outdoor applications. In these types of networks, conventional WLAN mesh nodes must be operated using continuous electrical power connections. This requirement may often be very expensive, especially when the network includes expansive outdoor wireless coverage areas. An alternative is to operate some of the WLAN mesh nodes using an energy sustainable source such as solar or wind power. This eliminates the need for a fixed power connection, making the node truly tetherless and allowing more flexibility in node positioning. In this article we first review the background and recent activities in the area of energy sustainable WLAN mesh networks. These types of networks are provisioned geographically, in that the assigned resources are a function of the geographic region where the network is to be deployed. The theory behind this is briefly described using some sample North American locations. We then discuss the current shortcomings of IEEE 802.1 1 when used in these types of networks. IEEE 802.11 requires that the access point be continuously powered, and this requirement is a major barrier to deploying cost-effective sustainable energy networks in certain applications. Recent work is then reviewed that has begun to address the changes that would be required to the standard to better support these types of networks.

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)0.002
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 score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.005
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.231
Teacher spread0.215 · 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

Citations54
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE NetworkSame topicEnergy Harvesting in Wireless NetworksFrench-language works237,207