A Column Generation Method for Constructing and Scheduling Multiple Forwarding Trees in Wireless Sensor Networks
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper considers the problem of jointly constructing and scheduling forwarding trees in a wireless sensor network, each to collect measurements from a group of sensor nodes at a single sink node. The goal is to construct such trees that gather measurements in the most energy efficient manner and with minimal gathering latency. We assume transmissions (carrying measurements) on wireless links interfere with one another, and thus, appropriate link scheduling is required to manage interference. We refer to this problem as forwarding tree construction and scheduling (FTCS). Each tree may be constructed independently, and then, its links are scheduled. However, when all trees are combined together, the shortest and energy efficient schedule may not be guaranteed. Furthermore, a large number of possible forwarding trees for each group of sensors may be considered. Both problems of enumerating forwarding trees and scheduling links for those trees are hard combinatorial problems. This is compounded by the fact that the two problems must be solved jointly, to guarantee the selection of the best forwarding trees that, when their links are scheduled, guarantee a shortest energy efficient schedule. After highlighting the complexity of the FTCS problem, we present a novel primal-dual decomposition method using column generation. We also highlight several challenges we faced when solving the decomposed problem and present efficient techniques for mitigating those challenges. One major advantage of this paper is that it can serve as a benchmark for evaluating the performance of any low complexity method for solving the FTCS problem for larger network instances, where no known exact solutions can be found.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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".