MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2524854129 · doi:10.1109/iwcmc.2016.7577057

Towards a smart universe: One droplet at a time

2016· article· en· W2524854129 on OpenAlexafffund
Khaled F. Hayajneh, Shahram Yousefi

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicError Correcting Code Techniques
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsFountain codeComputer scienceCode (set theory)Overhead (engineering)Network packetLuby transform codeTheoretical computer scienceTransmission (telecommunications)UnavailabilityDegree distributionAlgorithmScalabilitySet (abstract data type)Bit error rateComputer engineeringDecoding methodsBlock codeComputer networkMathematicsTelecommunicationsConcatenated error correction code

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The development of smart platforms in the Internet-of-Things (IoT) paradigm requires a number of technological advances to go hand in hand. IoT devices and entities have very diverse set of capabilities in terms of memory, power, and processing and are connected via a wide range of links with various qualities and capacities. This work focuses on the design of state-of-the-art data transmission methodology with arguably the highest level of flexibility and adaptability. We present a novel fountain-based encoding technique using overlapped generations of Luby-Transform (LT) codes. The proposed overlapped LT (OLT) codes achieve significant gains in BER and/or code rate. They are highly energy-efficient, scalable, and robust. Our analysis shows in particular that by using OLT codes, we can modify the fountain degree distribution such that it does not contain degree-one packets starting from the second generation. Thus, we introduce new degree distributions to improve the performance of OLT codes; the new scheme is referred to as smart OLT (SOLT). Simulation results are provided to show the improvements of OLT and SOLT codes in AWGN channel in terms of error rate. For example, SOLT codes can achieve the same error performance as LT codes, but they require smaller transmission overhead, for instance, at SNR of 9 dB and error rate of 10-5, SOLT codes require a code rate of 0.476 while LT codes require a code rate of 0.417.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.004
Scholarly communication0.0030.013
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0030.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.002

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.228
Teacher spread0.212 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicError Correcting Code TechniquesFrench-language works237,207