MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2990275077 · doi:10.18280/ria.330311

An Energy-Efficient Unequal Clustering Routing Algorithm for Wireless Sensor Network

2019· article· en· W2990275077 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Feifei Wang, Haifeng Hu

Bibliographic record

VenueRevue d intelligence artificielle · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicEnergy Efficient Wireless Sensor Networks
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCluster analysisWireless sensor networkComputer scienceComputer networkRouting algorithmDynamic Source RoutingRouting (electronic design automation)Energy (signal processing)Multipath routingKey distribution in wireless sensor networksAlgorithmWirelessDistributed computingRouting protocolWireless networkTelecommunicationsMathematicsArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The existing clustering routing protocols face imbalanced energy consumption and the hotspot problem.To solve the problems, this paper proposes an energy-efficient unequal clustering routing algorithm (UCRA).Firstly, the monitoring area was divided by concentric circles into rings of different sizes.Next, the cluster heads were elected based on position and residual energy.Before clustering, each common sensor joins a cluster based on the electability of each cluster head.The electability is defined based on the residual energy of the cluster head and the distance from the cluster head to the centerline of the ring of the common sensor.For multi-hop routing from a cluster head to the base station, the routing sensor was selected dynamically based on the local ring of the cluster head and the residual energy of neighboring cluster heads.The simulation results show that the UCRA can effectively solve the hot-spot problem in uniform clustering routing protocols, balance the energy consumption of network sensors, and extend the network lifecycle.

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)0.002
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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.253
Teacher spread0.231 · 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

Citations6
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRevue d intelligence artificielleSame topicEnergy Efficient Wireless Sensor NetworksFrench-language works237,207