Optimising the power using firework‐based evolutionary algorithms for emerging IoT applications
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Optimising the overall power in a cluster‐assisted internet of things (IoT) network is a challenging problem for emerging IoT applications. In this study, the authors propose a mathematical model for the cluster‐assisted IoT network. The cluster‐assisted IoT network consists of three types of nodes: IoT nodes, core cluster nodes (CCNs) and base stations (BSs). The objective is to minimise transmission, between IoT nodes (IoTs)–CCNs and CCNs–BSs, and computational power (at CCNs), while satisfying the requirements of communicating nodes. The formulated mathematical model is a integer programming problem. They propose three swarm intelligence‐based evolutionary algorithms: (i) a discrete fireworks algorithm (DFWA), (ii) a load‐aware DFWA (L‐DFWA), and (iii) a hybrid of the L‐DFWA and the low‐complexity biogeography‐based optimisation algorithm to solve the optimisation problem. The proposed algorithms are population‐based metaheuristic algorithms. They perform extensive simulations and statistical tests to show the performance of the proposed algorithms when compared with the existing ones.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it