Wavelet Filters Evaluation in Power Constrained Visual Sensor Networks
Bibliographic record
Abstract
While designing a wavelet-based coder (WBC) in the context of Visual Sensor Network (VSN), engineers and designers must respect their strict constraint on power consumption. This makes the selection of the appropriate wavelet, among many existing competitors, not an easy task. A set of wavelet filters are evaluated and the best of them are selected. The comparison is performed in terms of the quality of the reconstructed image at the base station and the power consumption of a visual sensor (VS) processing the wavelet. Image quality is measured objectively using PSNR and SSIM, and subjectively using the mean opinion score of many viewers. For power consumption, we have developed a power model based on the number of times basic operations are performed by the filters. Moreover, we show and discuss some factors, such as decomposition level and filter length, influencing the power dissipation of a given VS while executing a given wavelet under evaluation. Our results provide a good reference for designers of WBC for power-constrained applications such as VSN.
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) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 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 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".