Efficient Data Uploading for Mobile Crowdsensing via Team Collaborating and Matching
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
With the proliferation of mobile devices and crowdsensing applications, mobile crowdsensing (MCS) has been an appealing sensing paradigm as an alternative to the traditional sensor networks. Instead of deploying static and expensive sensors in sensing areas, MCS leverages sensors embedded in mobile devices and intelligence of mobile users to sense their surroundings, which utilizes the existing communication infrastructure. In a typical sensing cycle in MCS, recruited mobile users as workers collect data according to specified requirements and upload them to an MCS platform. A challenging problem of MCS is data uploading, which requires workers to upload their collected data in a cost-effective manner. A promising solution is to integrate edge computing and exploit the redundant resources of various edge nodes to facilitate data uploading. In this paper, we investigate such a data uploading problem in MCS, which incorporates collaborations among multiple edge nodes and properly matches a team of edge nodes with a sensing worker according to various constraints. Notably, we ensure that the demand of a worker for data uploading is fully satisfied even if served by multiple edge nodes. As we prove that the problem is NP-hard, we propose an efficient solution based on Lagrangian relaxation. Extensive numerical results show that our approach achieves a high approximation ratio and performs stably in various experiment settings.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it