MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2797506564 · doi:10.1109/lsp.2018.2825951

Performance Analysis of Distributed Wireless Sensor Networks for Gaussian Source Estimation in the Presence of Impulsive Noise

2018· article· en· W2797506564 on OpenAlexaff
Md Sahabul Alam, Georges Kaddoum, Basile L. Agba

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Signal Processing Letters · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicDistributed Sensor Networks and Detection Algorithms
Canadian institutionsHydro-QuébecÉcole de Technologie SupérieureUniversité du Québec à Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMinimum mean square errorEstimatorGaussian noiseFadingComputer scienceRayleigh fadingMean squared errorAlgorithmAdditive white Gaussian noiseFusion centerGaussianWireless sensor networkNoise powerNoise (video)Channel (broadcasting)WirelessMathematicsStatisticsTelecommunicationsPower (physics)Cognitive radioComputer networkArtificial intelligencePhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We address the distributed estimation of a scalar Gaussian source in wireless sensor networks. The sensor nodes transmit their noisy observations, using the amplify-and-forward relaying strategy through coherent multiple access channel to the fusion center (FC) that reconstructs the source parameter. In this letter, we assume that the received signal at the FC is corrupted by impulsive noise and channel fading, as encountered for instance within power substations. Over Rayleigh fading channel and in presence of Middleton class-A impulsive noise, we derive the minimum mean square error (MMSE) optimal Bayesian estimator along with its mean square error performance bounds. From the obtained results, we conclude that the proposed optimal MMSE estimator outperforms the linear MMSE estimator developed for Gaussian noise scenario.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.024
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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.024

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.024
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.239
Teacher spread0.229 · 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

Citations15
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Signal Processing LettersSame topicDistributed Sensor Networks and Detection AlgorithmsFrench-language works237,207