MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3002633637 · doi:10.3390/fi12020019

MCCM: An Approach for Connectivity and Coverage Maximization

2020· article· en· W3002633637 on OpenAlexaff
Alia Ghaddar, Monah Bou Hatoum, Ghassan Fadlallah, Hamid Mcheick

Bibliographic record

VenueFuture Internet · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicEnergy Efficient Wireless Sensor Networks
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à Chicoutimi
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceMaximizationDistributed computingQuality of serviceWireless sensor networkInternet of ThingsCover (algebra)WirelessObject (grammar)Computer networkReal-time computingTelecommunicationsComputer securityArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The internet of Things (IoT) has attracted significant attention in many applications in both academic and industrial areas. In IoT, each object can have the capabilities of sensing, identifying, networking and processing to communicate with ubiquitous objects and services. Often this paradigm (IoT) using Wireless Sensor Networks must cover large area of interest (AoI) with huge number of devices. As these devices might be battery powered and randomly deployed, their long-term availability and connectivity for area coverage is very important, in particular in harsh environments. Moreover, a poor distribution of devices may lead to coverage holes and degradation to the quality of service. In this paper, we propose an approach for self-organization and coverage maximization. We present a distributed algorithm for “Maintaining Connectivity and Coverage Maximization” called M C C M . The algorithm operates on different movable devices in homogeneous and heterogeneous distribution. It does not require high computational complexity. The main goal is to keep the movement of devices as minimal as possible to save energy. Another goal is to reduce the overlapping areas covered by different devices to increase the coverage while maintaining connectivity. Simulation results show that the proposed algorithm can achieve higher coverage and lower nodes’ movement over existing algorithms in the state of the art.

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)0.003
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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0030.002
Research integrity0.0020.001
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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.216
Teacher spread0.200 · 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
GenreMethods

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

Citations3
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFuture InternetSame topicEnergy Efficient Wireless Sensor NetworksFrench-language works237,207