MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3200335000 · doi:10.1109/jiot.2021.3114423

Reliable and Low-Overhead Clustering in LEO Small Satellite Networks

2021· article· en· W3200335000 on OpenAlexaff
Jiang Liu, Xinyuan Zhang, Ran Zhang, Tao Huang, F. Richard Yu

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Internet of Things Journal · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSatellite Communication Systems
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
FundersNational Key Research and Development Program of China
KeywordsComputer scienceCluster analysisScalabilityDistributed computingOverhead (engineering)Network topologySatelliteComputer networkArtificial intelligenceEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Low earth orbit (LEO) small satellites have attracted great interests in civilian and military applications due to their low cost and high service performance. However, the enormous scale and high dynamism of small satellites pose challenges to network flexibility and scalability. Therefore, the hierarchical satellite network structure is introduced as an effective approach to enhance the satellite network capabilities further. In this regard, small satellites’ clustering is of fundamental importance for designing such a hierarchical structure. Satellite clusters are always prone to instability due to unpredictable link failures and frequent topology changes. In this article, we study the small satellite clustering problem of jointly optimizing the cluster reliability and the network management overhead. A coalition game-theoretic framework is introduced to obtain low computational complexity by adopting the clustering-decision-making process in an automated and fully distributed fashion. A distributed coalition formation algorithm based on the optimization of reliability and management overhead is developed for the clustering problem. Finally, extensive simulations have been conducted, and the results show that our proposed clustering scheme is able to produce better results than the baseline schemes.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.429
Threshold uncertainty score0.609

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.228
Teacher spread0.208 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations35
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Internet of Things JournalSame topicSatellite Communication SystemsFrench-language works237,207