MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2916760466 · doi:10.1109/tmc.2019.2901671

On the Interaction of Charging-Aware Mobility and Wireless Capacity

2019· article· en· W2916760466 on OpenAlexaff
Wanxin Gao, Ioanis Nikolaidis, Janelle Harms

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Mobile Computing · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicEnergy Harvesting in Wireless Networks
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceComputer networkWaypointWirelessNode (physics)Inductive chargingMobility modelMobile deviceHotspot (geology)Wireless networkTelecommunicationsReal-time computingEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Today's mobile battery-powered communication devices require that users access chargers via wired and, recently, wireless recharging facilities. For a device departing from a location with a given energy “budget”, a plausible strategy is to seek a charger location once the energy is exhausted. We present a model of mobile nodes that captures the paths followed by the nodes with depleted energy seeking, possibly via a detour, to reach a charger. The derived location-dependent mobile node density distribution is used to express the location-dependent congestion of a wireless network whose capacity is used by the mobile nodes. The boundaries, and the relative placement of the charger, create intriguing discontinuities in the probability density function of the nodes across space. We find that chargers are not always “hotspots” in terms of node density, and that the energy budget of the nodes at the beginning of their trip impacts that density and determines the hotspot. Moreover, upon energy depletion, to detour from one's path or not, results in a distinctly different relative impact of the charger placement on the ability of nodes to sustain communication, depending, again on the energy budget the nodes have upon departure from a waypoint.

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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.201
Threshold uncertainty score0.646

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.214
Teacher spread0.201 · 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

Citations9
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Mobile ComputingSame topicEnergy Harvesting in Wireless NetworksFrench-language works237,207