MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2959606730 · doi:10.1109/icc.2019.8761355

Power Conservation in Cloud-Assisted Real-Time Context Learning System

2019· article· en· W2959606730 on OpenAlexaff
Jean-Franois Laplante, Bhaskar Das, Jalal Almhana

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicContext-Aware Activity Recognition Systems
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Moncton
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCloud computingComputer scienceReal-time computingMobile deviceContext (archaeology)Process (computing)Mobile computingComputer networkOperating system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Contextual information can be learned at the mobile devices, such as smartphones, in real-time from the sensors to provide better services to the user. The sensor data collection process, where the data is collected by various internal sensors or autonomous external sensors, incurs greater power consumption, depending upon the type of sensor and data capturing rate in the mobile devices. On the other hand, the learning process itself drains the battery and at the same time affects the accuracy of the learning due to the limited computational power of the mobile devices. These problems can be addressed by shifting the learning process to the cloud, which is however achieved at the cost of reducing the accuracy of the real-time solutions and incurs heavy bandwidth usage depending upon the context of the user. Therefore, we propose a cloud-based real-time context-learning system where the user of the system will get the predetermined service in real-time according to the userdetermined context, which is learned from the related sensors while conserving a maximum amount of power compared to the standalone system or the cloud-based system. We have produced experimental results using a smartphone that illustrates that our system conserves 96.36% of power compared to the mobilelearning system while at the same time, the network data usage is 80% lower when compared to the cloud-based system. We have also showed that the proposed system works 76.17% and 94.81% faster compared to the mobile-learning and cloud-based system respectively.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.228
Teacher spread0.213 · 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
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicContext-Aware Activity Recognition SystemsFrench-language works237,207