Data Gathering in Wireless Sensor Networks Based on Reshuffling Cluster Compressed Sensing
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The existing compressed sensing (CS) based data gathering (CSDG) methods in wireless sensor networks (WSNs) usually assume that the sensed data are sparse or compressible. However, the sparsity of raw sensed data in some case is not straightforward. In this paper, we present reshuffling cluster compressed sensing based data gathering (RCCSDG) method to achieve both energy efficiency and reconstruction accuracy in WSNs. By incorporating CS into the cluster protocol, RCCSDG is able to reduce the energy consumption and support larger networks. Moreover, the sparsity of raw sensed data can be greatly improved by reshuffling pretreatment. A theoretical analysis to energy consumption of cluster head is performed, and the cost of the pretreatment is small enough to be neglected. Based on these natures, the raw sensed data can be recovered from fewer samples. Also, considering the sensed data to be of excellent temporal stability in a short time, we reshuffle them just one time in this stable period to further reduce the energy consumption of WSNs. In addition, the delay of RCCSDG is analyzed based on TDMA2 scheduling scheme. We carry out simulations on real sensor datasets. The results show that the RCCSDG can effectively compress the data transmission and decrease energy consumption of WSNs while ensuring the reconstruction accuracy.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".