MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2900068116 · doi:10.1109/jiot.2018.2880463

Coverage-Guaranteed and Energy-Efficient Participant Selection Strategy in Mobile Crowdsensing

2018· article· en· W2900068116 on OpenAlex
Haneul Ko, Sangheon Pack, Victor C. M. Leung

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Internet of Things Journal · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicMobile Crowdsensing and Crowdsourcing
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersNational Research Foundation of KoreaKorea UniversityNational Research Foundation
KeywordsComputer scienceCrowdsensingMarkov decision processCurse of dimensionalityHeuristicEnergy consumptionSelection (genetic algorithm)Greedy algorithmProcess (computing)Artificial intelligenceMarkov processAlgorithm

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In mobile crowdsensing (MCS), a participant selection strategy should be carefully designed to guarantee sufficient coverage and avoid unnecessary energy consumption. In this paper, we propose a coverage-guaranteed and energy-efficient participant selection (CG-EEPS) strategy, in which the MCS server determines participants based on the data usage profile and mobility level of mobile devices. In addition, CG-EEPS adopts a piggyback approach of sensory data for energy-efficient transmissions. To attain the optimal performance in CG-EEPS, a constraint Markov decision process (CMDP) problem is formulated and its optimal policy is obtained by a linear programming. To address the curse of dimensionality in CMDP, a greedy heuristic is proposed and evaluated. Trace-driven evaluation results demonstrate that CG-EEPS can achieve sufficient coverage rate only with 20% of participants compared to random selection schemes.

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 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)0.001
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.751
Threshold uncertainty score0.641

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.258
Teacher spread0.238 · 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