Bayesian Compressive Sensing Based Optimized Node Selection Scheme in Underwater Sensor Networks
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Information acquisition in underwater sensor networks is usually limited by energy and bandwidth. Fortunately, the received signal can be represented sparsely on some basis. Therefore, a compressed sensing method can be used to collect the information by selecting a subset of the total sensor nodes. The conventional compressed sensing scheme is to select some sensor nodes randomly. The network lifetime and the correlation of sensor nodes are not considered. Therefore, it is significant to adjust the sensor node selection scheme according to these factors for the superior performance. In this paper, an optimized sensor node selection scheme is given based on Bayesian estimation theory. The advantage of Bayesian estimation is to give the closed-form expression of posterior density function and error covariance matrix. The proposed optimization problem first aims at minimizing the mean square error (MSE) of Bayesian estimation based on a given error covariance matrix. Then, the non-convex optimization problem is transformed as a convex semidefinite programming problem by relaxing the constraints. Finally, the residual energy of each sensor node is taken into account as a constraint in the optimization problem. Simulation results demonstrate that the proposed scheme has better performance than a conventional compressed sensing scheme.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".