Energy-Efficient and Fault-Tolerant Evolution Models for Large-Scale Wireless Sensor Networks: A Complex Networks-Based Approach
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this paper, we present three network evolution models for generating fault-tolerant and energy- efficient large-scale peer-to-peer wireless sensor networks (WSNs) based on complex networks theory. Being scale-free is one of the intrinsic features of complex networks-based evolution models that generates fault- tolerant topologies. In this work, we argue that fault- tolerant topologies are not necessarily energy efficient. The three proposed energy-aware evolution models are energy-aware common neighbors (ECN), energy- aware large degree promoted (ELDP) and energy-aware large degree demoted (ELDD). ECN considers neighborhood overlap, whereas ELDP and ELDD consider topological overlap for node attachment. The ELDP model promotes the establishment of links to nodes with a large degree, whereas the ELDD model demotes this strategy. Performance evaluations demonstrate that the proposed models outperform a candidate clustering-based model, thereby providing greater energy savings and fault- tolerance. Among the proposed models, ECN is the winner in-terms of energy efficiency, ELDD performs best in- terms of fault-tolerance, and ELDP conveniently provides balance between the two.
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.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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 it