MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2171128671 · doi:10.1109/sensorcomm.2008.72

Localized Topology Control Algorithm with No Geometric Information for Ad Hoc Sensor Networks

2008· article· en· W2171128671 on OpenAlexaff
Kamrul Islam, Selim G. Akl

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicEnergy Efficient Wireless Sensor Networks
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsUnit disk graphWireless sensor networkComputer scienceWireless ad hoc networkTopology controlTopology (electrical circuits)SpannerAlgorithmRandom geometric graphNetwork topologyGraphComputer networkWireless networkTheoretical computer scienceMathematicsKey distribution in wireless sensor networksDistributed computingWirelessLine graphCombinatoricsVoltage graph

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We present a localized algorithm (LTCA) for topology control in wireless sensor networks which has certain desirable properties. First, the algorithm is very simple, strictly local (requires 1-hop information of neighbors) and fast, requiring each node to communicate with its neighbors exactly twice. Second, LTCA does not assume the underlying graph to be a unit disk graph, and in fact works on general graphs. Third, the most important feature of LTCA is that it is completely independent of any location information of nodes in the network graph; it relies only on the connectivity information and the identities (ids) of the neighboring nodes. Assuming sensor nodes are deployed in the plane, it is shown that the resulting subgraph obtained by our algorithm is connected, symmetric and contains few edge crossings. We provide simulation results and show that on random graphs the resulting topology is spanner and the average degree of the subgraph is low. Due to the simplicity of the algorithm, LTCA can easily be implemented in practical ad hoc sensor 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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.230
Threshold uncertainty score0.744

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.197
Teacher spread0.191 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations5
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicEnergy Efficient Wireless Sensor NetworksFrench-language works237,207