MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3015914955 · doi:10.1109/iotm.0001.1900073

BLE Beacons in the Smart City: Applications, Challenges, and Research Opportunities

2020· article· en· W3015914955 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Internet of Things Magazine · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicBluetooth and Wireless Communication Technologies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoUniversity of Guelph
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBeaconInternet of ThingsBluetoothWirelessBluetooth Low EnergyBroadcasting (networking)IdentifierUnique identifier

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Internet of Things helps to have every individual interconnected with their surroundings and to interact with them through smart devices. In recent years, Bluetooth Low Energy (BLE) technology has become very popular in smart infrastructures, the medical field, the retail industry, and many more areas due to its availability in a plethora of wireless devices. BLE is widely used in IoT devices, such as smartphones, smart watches, and BLE beacons. Beacons are small, low-cost, and low-power wireless transmitters that bring attention to their location by broadcasting a signal with a unique identifier at regular intervals. BLE beacons are a promising solution for many smart city applications, from proximity marketing to indoor navigation. However, they do pose security and privacy challenges. This work discusses the characteristics of BLE beacons, the applications that can benefit from them, and the challenges they pose while trying to identify research opportunities and future directions.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.888
Threshold uncertainty score0.427

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.230
GPT teacher head0.331
Teacher spread0.101 · 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