A novel approach of localization with Single Mobile Anchor using Salp Swarm Algorithm in Wireless Sensor Networks
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Wireless sensor networks (WSNs) have fabulous attributes to collect data by sensing the surrounding environment. WSNs have a large number of applications that are facing challenges of routing, security, deployment, prolonged lifetime, data computation, and localization. To achieve the high-level performance of WSNs, many researchers have proposed various computational Intelligence (CI) based algorithms for the above-mentioned challenges. The procedure to determine the location of the target node is called node localization. It is easy to determine the coordinates of static nodes accurately but challenging task for the mobile nodes. Localization accuracy directly affects the WSN’s performance. In this paper, a range-based and distributed method are proposed by using the application of the Salp Swarm Algorithm (SSA), and the simulation results are compared with existing approaches such as Particle swarm Optimization (PSO) and H-best Particle Swarm Optimization (HPSO). In this paper, a single mobile anchor node as a reference node traversing the entire network in the Hilbert path and localize the mobile target nodes that are randomly deployed in the networking area. The primary goal behind selecting the Hilbert trajectory is to reduce the issue of LoS. The simulation results show that the proposed method has low localization error and an approximate double number of localized nodes with less computing time as compared to existing methods.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".