MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3124879279 · doi:10.1109/lcn48667.2020.9314847

Bounding Path Exposure in Energy Harvesting Wireless Sensor Networks Using Pathsets and Cutsets

2020· article· en· W3124879279 on OpenAlexaff
Abdulsalam Basabaa, Ehab S. Elmallah

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicEnergy Harvesting in Wireless Networks
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWireless sensor networkTree traversalBounding overwatchComputer scienceGuard (computer science)Node (physics)Probabilistic logicContext (archaeology)Shortest path problemPath (computing)Energy (signal processing)Computer networkDistributed computingReal-time computingGraphAlgorithmTheoretical computer scienceMathematicsEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this work, we consider a fundamental wireless sensor network (WSN) problem where the network is deployed to guard against unauthorized traversal along a given path. Nodes are assumed to utilize energy harvesting from the ambient environment, and fluctuations in a node's energy are assumed to affect its transmission range. In this context, we investigate a problem called the path exposure with range uncertainty (EXPO-RU) problem that asks for the likelihood that the EH-WSN can provide joint detection and reporting of the traversal. The problem models the EH-WSN using a probabilistic graph where each node is associated with multiple possible states. We present algorithms for deriving lower and upper bounds from operating and failed network configurations, respectively. We discuss properties of the presented methods, present numerical results that illustrate their usefulness, and draw remarks on the obtained numerical results.

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)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.032
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 score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.039

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.032
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0020.005
Open science0.0030.004
Research integrity0.0030.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.200
Teacher spread0.183 · 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
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicEnergy Harvesting in Wireless NetworksFrench-language works237,207