MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2888349895 · doi:10.1109/jsen.2018.2866686

ADMM-Based Sensor Network Localization Using Low-Rank Approximation

2018· article· en· W2888349895 on OpenAlexaff
Yanping Zhu, Aimin Jiang, Hon Keung Kwan

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Sensors Journal · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicIndoor and Outdoor Localization Technologies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Windsor
FundersNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsSemidefinite programmingMatrix completionScalabilityWireless sensor networkEuclidean distance matrixRange (aeronautics)ScalingMatrix (chemical analysis)Computer scienceAlgorithmDistance matrixEuclidean distanceMultidimensional scalingMathematical optimizationMathematicsArtificial intelligenceEngineeringMachine learning

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, we present an efficient localization algorithm for sensor networks using range information. Since each sensor can only communicate with its neighbors, the Euclidean distance matrix (EDM), composed by squared distances between each pair of sensors, is incomplete. The first step of the proposed algorithm is to fulfill the EDM completion and relative maps of sensor networks are then achieved by the multidimensional scaling technique. Besides the EDM, the centralized Gram matrix of sensors’ coordinates is also used to model the localization problem. Compared with other EDM-based localization algorithms, mathematical properties of both the EDM and the Gram matrix are appropriately exploited so as to improve the estimation accuracy. The resulting localization model is formulated as a semidefinite programming problem. An alternating direction method of multipliers is further developed to enhance the scalability of the proposed algorithm. The numerical experiments demonstrate that the proposed algorithm can effectively improve the estimation accuracy of both the EDM completion and the final localization.

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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.709
Threshold uncertainty score0.809

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.233
Teacher spread0.218 · 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
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

Citations13
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Sensors JournalSame topicIndoor and Outdoor Localization TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207