MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2543901715 · doi:10.1109/inteles.2014.7008978

Fuzzy algorithm for intelligent wireless sensors with solar harvesting

2014· article· en· W2543901715 on OpenAlexaff
Michal Prauzek, Petr Musı́lek, Asher G. Watts

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicEnergy Harvesting in Wireless Networks
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDependabilityComputer scienceWirelessAdaptabilityFuzzy logicDistributed computingFault toleranceEnergy harvestingEnergy (signal processing)Wireless sensor networkEmbedded systemReal-time computingArtificial intelligenceComputer network

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Wireless sensors are sophisticated embedded systems designed for collecting data on systems or processes of interest. In many cases, they are expected to operate in inaccessible locations, without user supervision. As a result, such monitoring systems need to operate autonomously and independently of external sources of energy. To achieve long-lived sustainability, monitoring systems often rely on energy extracted from the environment, e.g. through solar harvesting. Their design is a challenging problem with several conflicting goals and a number of design and implementation possibilities. For obvious reasons, these devices must be designed in an energy efficient way. As a result, they usually have low computational performance and cannot implement complicated control algorithms. At the same time, due to the requirements for autonomy and dependability, they must be endowed with certain degree of adaptability and fault tolerance - properties typically found in intelligent systems. In this contribution, we describe the design flow of an intelligent embedded control system for management of energy use in wireless monitoring systems. The paper also provides a simulation-based analysis of the control system performance.

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 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)0.000
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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.602
Threshold uncertainty score0.948

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.201
Teacher spread0.191 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

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

Citations18
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicEnergy Harvesting in Wireless NetworksFrench-language works237,207