MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2328689326 · doi:10.1109/comst.2016.2548360

Comparative Examination on Architecture and Protocol of Industrial Wireless Sensor Network Standards

2016· article· en· W2328689326 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Communications Surveys & Tutorials · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicEnergy Efficient Wireless Sensor Networks
Canadian institutionsWestern University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsProtocol (science)Wireless sensor networkArchitectureKey (lock)Computer scienceComputer networkNeuRFonProtocol stackWirelessEmbedded systemWireless networkEngineeringTelecommunicationsSystems engineeringComputer securityKey distribution in wireless sensor networks

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper discusses key aspects of the four most popular industrial wireless sensor network standards: ZigBee, WirelessHART, ISA100.11a, and WIA-PA. The detailed design and protocol architectures are comparatively examined. The uniqueness of each standard is highlighted and justifications for their design are provided. Similarities and differences among these standards at each protocol layer are compared. With consideration of the scopes and the limitations of these standards, the suitability of these standards to meet the industrial requirements has also been examined.

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 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)0.006
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: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.857
Threshold uncertainty score0.805

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0020.000
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 head0.074
GPT teacher head0.331
Teacher spread0.256 · 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