On the benefits of network coding to compressive data gathering in wireless sensor networks
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We investigate the joint application of compressive sensing and network coding to the problem of energy efficient data gathering in wireless sensor networks. We consider the problem of optimally constructing forwarding trees to carry compressed data to projection nodes; each compressed data refers to a weighted aggregation of measurements from sensors collected at one projection node. Projection nodes then forward their received compressed data to the sink, which subsequently recovers the original measurements. This aggregation technique based on compressive sensing is shown to reduce significantly the number of transmissions. We observe that the presence of multiple forwarding trees gives rise to many-to-many communication patterns which in turn can be exploited to perform network coding on the compressed data being forwarded on these trees. Such technique will further reduce the number of transmissions required to gather the measurements, and consequently result in a better network-wide energy efficiency. This paper addresses the problem of network coding aware construction of forwarding/aggregation trees and we present a mathematical model to optimally construct such trees. We also develop a decentralized method for solving the problem and we show that our method is both very scalable and accurate. We also show that when both network coding and compressive data gathering are considered jointly, modest gains may be attained.
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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".