MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Exploiting External Interference for Clock Synchronization

2019· article· en· W3005044633 on OpenAlexaff
Aidan D. Bush, Nicholas M. Boers, Jakob Bowering

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicNetwork Time Synchronization Technologies
Canadian institutionsMacEwan University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsClock synchronizationSynchronization (alternating current)Computer scienceNode (physics)Interference (communication)Clock driftWireless sensor networkReal-time computingTime synchronizationProtocol (science)Computer networkWireless networkNetwork simulationNetwork Time ProtocolWirelessTelecommunicationsEngineeringChannel (broadcasting)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Many wireless sensor network (WSN) applications require the synchronization of the network's independent node clocks. That synchronization is a challenging problem that often requires energy-constrained devices to exchange many messages.This paper introduces the Interference-based Clock Synchronization (ICS) protocol, an approach suitable for dense WSNs located in urban environments. ICS uses external interference to synchronize the network's nodes to either a network-local internal or global (e.g., UTC) external time. All of the network's nodes observe interference at roughly the same time, and the node possessing the common time transmits its observed pattern to the network. The network nodes then compare and align the received and locally-observed patterns, and subsequently, they update their clocks to the common time.The protocol is evaluated using both a simulator and hardware. Using this approach, the number of transmitted messages scales linearly with the network size. In the simulator, ICS-synchronized clocks had a mean time difference of 0.3635 ms when compared with the common time. Using hardware, the difference was larger at 4.9388 ms, but much of that difference can likely be attributed to the experimental setup.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.231
Teacher spread0.219 · 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 topicNetwork Time Synchronization TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207