MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3159885913 · doi:10.3390/s21093073

State of the Art of Telecommunication Systems in Isolated and Constrained Areas

2021· review· en· W3159885913 on OpenAlexaffabout
Laurent Ferrier, Hussein Ibrahim, Mohamad Issa, Adrian Ilinca

Bibliographic record

VenueSensors · 2021
Typereview
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicEnergy Harvesting in Wireless Networks
Canadian institutionsCegep de Sept IlesUniversité du Québec à Rimouski
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTelecommunicationsState (computer science)Field (mathematics)Isolation (microbiology)Computer scienceRemote sensingGeographyBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Smart objects are deployed globally, contributing to improved communications and the growth of industrial systems’ performances. Unfortunately, isolated territories are generally excluded from this progress. Remote areas in Canada are no exception. Thus, about two hundred thousand people are living in isolated regions in Canadian territory. The development of these communities is slowed down not only by an outdated energy supply, but they are also dependent on telecommunication systems not fully deployed in those regions, thus contributing to the amplification of those populations’ isolation. Furthermore, in many remote regions of the planet, radio communication remains difficult due to geographical constraints, environmental attenuation, and the lack of telecommunication infrastructure. These regions are often referred to as “white areas,” meaning zones with little or no communication coverage. As a part of this article, a state of the art of telecommunication solutions available in an isolated environment is applied with a critical analysis based on several criteria. It shows the ability to use an original approach based on a captive balloon. Despite the proposed solution’s feasibility, several challenges need to be addressed before formally adopting it. These challenges include: (i) controlling the height of the balloon; (ii) stabilization of the balloon; and (iii) powering the system. The list of references given at the end of the paper should offer aids for the industry and for researchers working in this field.

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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.002

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.245
Teacher spread0.226 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations4
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSensorsSame topicEnergy Harvesting in Wireless NetworksFrench-language works237,207