On the Impact of Sweep Radius and Energy Limitation on Sweep Coverage in Wireless Sensor Networks
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Sweep coverage is an important problem in Wireless Sensor Networks (WSNs). Technically, sweep coverage makes use of mobile sensor nodes that move around to collect sensing data from Points of Interest (POIs) at a low cost. Since POIs can often be sensed remotely, mobile sensor nodes do not have to arrive at the location of POIs to gather sensing data. Sweep radius, the maximum distance between a mobile sensor node and a POI that enables sensing, is an important factor in sweep coverage planning. In addition, because mobile sensor nodes are typically powered by batteries, they tend to have a limited lifetime. To continue the coverage, mobile sensor nodes have to periodically return to the base station to replenish their energy. In this paper, sweep coverage based on sweep radius and energy limitation is formulated as the (t, T, R)-SCBR problem. To tackle the (t, T, R)-SCBR problem, a centralized algorithm (i.e. CPS) and a distributed algorithm (i.e. DPP) are proposed. Through extensive simulations, we found that the proposed algorithms significantly outperform the existing 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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.022 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".