MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3046489877 · doi:10.1049/iet-its.2020.0009

Predictive model for battery life in IoT networks

2020· article· en· W3046489877 on OpenAlexaff
Praveen Kumar Reddy Maddikunta, Gautam Srivastava, Thippa Reddy Gadekallu, N. Deepa, Prabadevi Boopathy

Bibliographic record

VenueIET Intelligent Transport Systems · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced Battery Technologies Research
Canadian institutionsBrandon University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInternet of ThingsBattery (electricity)Computer scienceEmbedded systemReal-time computing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The internet of things (IoT) is prominently used in the present world. Although it has vast potential in several applications, it has several challenges in the real‐world. One of the most important challenges is conservation of battery life in devices used throughout IoT networks. Since many IoT devices are not rechargeable, several steps to conserve the battery life of an IoT network can be taken using the early prediction of battery life. In this study, a machine learning based model implementing a random forest regression algorithm is used to predict the battery life of IoT devices. The proposed model is experimented on ‘Beach Water Quality – Automated Sensors’ data set generated from sensors in an IoT network from the city of Chicago, USA. Several pre‐processing techniques like normalisation, transformation and dimensionality reduction are used in this model. The proposed model achieved a 97% predictive accuracy. The results obtained proved that the proposed model performs better than other state‐of‐art regression algorithms in preserving the battery life of IoT devices.

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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.018
Threshold uncertainty score0.036

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.049
GPT teacher head0.260
Teacher spread0.211 · 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

Citations103
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIET Intelligent Transport SystemsSame topicAdvanced Battery Technologies ResearchFrench-language works237,207