MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2789530668 · doi:10.1109/jiot.2018.2797174

A Software-Defined Surveillance System With Energy Harvesting: Design and Performance Optimization

2018· article· en· W2789530668 on OpenAlexaff
Haneul Ko, Sangheon Pack

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Internet of Things Journal · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicEnergy Harvesting in Wireless Networks
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersNational Research Foundation
KeywordsComputer scienceMarkov decision processEnergy consumptionWireless sensor networkReal-time computingScheduling (production processes)Energy harvestingSoftware deploymentSoftwareMathematical optimizationEnergy (signal processing)Markov processComputer network

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Even though energy harvesting is a promising technology for energy-efficient surveillance systems, energy harvesting levels are highly dynamic depending on the time and location. Thus, the deployment of nonenergy-harvesting sensor nodes (NHSs) and sophisticated sleep scheduling of sensor nodes are necessary for performance guaranteed surveillance systems. In this paper, we present a software-defined surveillance system (SDSS) in which a centralized controller determines the sleep schedules of energy harvesting and NHSs on the basis of the collected information such as the spatial distribution of targets and the energy levels of sensor nodes. To derive the optimal sleep schedules minimizing the number of active sensor nodes while providing sufficient surveillance performance, a constraint Markov decision process problem is formulated and the optimal policy on sleep scheduling is obtained by linear programming. The evaluation results demonstrate that the SDSS with the optimal policy can reduce energy consumption by employing fewer active sensor nodes while providing the required level of target monitoring probability.

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 score0.672
Threshold uncertainty score0.702

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.180
Teacher spread0.171 · 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

Citations19
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Internet of Things JournalSame topicEnergy Harvesting in Wireless NetworksFrench-language works237,207