Decision Fusion for IoT-Based Wireless Sensor Networks
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article presents a novel decision fusion algorithm for Internet-of-Things-based wireless sensor networks, where multiple sensors transmit their decisions about a certain phenomenon to a remote fusion center (FC) over a wide area network. The proposed algorithm denoted as the individual likelihood approximation (ILA) can significantly reduce the decision fusion error probability performance while maintaining the low computational complexity of other state-of-the-art fusion algorithms. The performance of the ILA rule is evaluated in terms of the global fusion probability of error, and an efficient analytical expression is derived in terms of a single integral. The analytical results corroborated by Monte Carlo simulation show that the ILA significantly outperforms all other considered rules, such as the Chair-Varshney (CV) and MaxLog rules. Moreover, the impact of the link from the cluster head to the FC, which is modeled as a binary symmetric channel with unknown transition probabilities, has been investigated. It is shown that the probability of error over such links should not exceed 10 <sup xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">-3</sup> to avoid severe performance degradation. Furthermore, we derive a closed-form expression for the system fusion error probability of the CV rule for the most general system parameters.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it