MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2909736826 · doi:10.1109/iemcon.2018.8614763

A practical study on Bluetooth Low Energy (BLE) throughput

2018· article· en· W2909736826 on OpenAlexaff
F. John Dian, Amirhossein Yousefi, Sungjoon Lim

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicBluetooth and Wireless Communication Technologies
Canadian institutionsBritish Columbia Institute of Technology
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceThroughputNetwork packetComputer networkBluetoothNode (physics)Protocol (science)Real-time computingWirelessTelecommunications

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The data rate of Bluetooth Low Energy (BLE) is 1Mbps, and 2Mbps for BLE 4.2 and BLE 5, respectively. However, the throughput of a BLE system would be much lower since we need to account for various protocol overheads, adaptive RF connection adjustments for maintaining robust links amid interference, and protocol limitations based on BLE data exchange strategy and operations such as connection intervals, packet size and packet acknowledgment scheme. In this paper, we practically investigate the maximum throughput achievable in a simple BLE 4.2 network of two nodes, used in a data logging application. In this type of application, one node always has data to transmit and the other node which collects the transmitted sensor data does not have any data to send. We will also consider the effect of BLE parameters in this study. The result of our study shows that the maximum amount of throughput is 221.7 kbps for this application under the condition that the wireless link is error free and application always has data to transmit.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.022
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.022
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.004
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.050
GPT teacher head0.326
Teacher spread0.277 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations52
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicBluetooth and Wireless Communication TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207