MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2912015095 · doi:10.1109/mwscas.2018.8623820

Designing Optimal Thresholds for Ternary Event-based State Estimation via Multi Objective Particle Swarm Optimizer

2018· article· en· W2912015095 on OpenAlexaff
Somayeh Davar, Arash Mohammadi

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicDistributed Sensor Networks and Detection Algorithms
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsParticle swarm optimizationComputer scienceMathematical optimizationEvent (particle physics)MinificationMaximizationOverhead (engineering)Set (abstract data type)Multi-swarm optimizationProcess (computing)AlgorithmMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The paper proposes a novel multi-objective approach for optimizing the threshold values in a ternary event-triggering (TET) mechanism using within event-based estimation architecture. In particular, Multi-Objective Particle Swarm Optimization (MOPSO) is employed as the optimization technique considering three objectives, i.e., the maximization of the rate of communicating quantized measurements together with the minimization of the number of idle and event epochs. In addition, the optimization process is subject to three constraints in order to guarantee the feasibility of the overall structure. The multi-objective optimizer has been utilized to automatically find the optimal design. The proposed method, referred to as the TEB-PSO, is capable of identifying a set of optimal values for the two thresholds within the TET to reduce the communication overhead. The simulation results confirm the effectiveness of the proposed method with the TET mechanism.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.277
Teacher spread0.256 · 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 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

Citations1
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicDistributed Sensor Networks and Detection AlgorithmsFrench-language works237,207