MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3215291346 · doi:10.3390/s21238011

A Local 3D Voronoi-Based Optimization Method for Sensor Network Deployment in Complex Indoor Environments

2021· article· en· W3215291346 on OpenAlexafffund
Ali Afghantoloee, Mir Abolfazl Mostafavi

Bibliographic record

VenueSensors · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicIndoor and Outdoor Localization Technologies
Canadian institutionsUniversité LavalCentre for Interdisciplinary Research in Rehabilitation
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsVoronoi diagramSoftware deploymentComputer scienceGenetic algorithmWireless sensor networkCMA-ESAdaptation (eye)Real-time computingEvolution strategyOptimization problemDistributed computingEvolutionary algorithmArtificial intelligenceAlgorithmMachine learningComputer network

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Optimal sensor network deployment in built environments for tracking, surveillance, and monitoring of dynamic phenomena is one of the most challenging issues in sensor network design and applications (e.g., people movement). Most of the current methods for sensor network deployment and optimization are empirical and they often result in important coverage gaps in the monitored areas. To overcome these limitations, several optimization methods have been proposed in the recent years. However, most of these methods oversimplify the environment and do not consider the complexity of 3D architectural nature of the built environments specially for indoor applications (e.g., indoor navigation, evacuation, etc.). In this paper, we propose a novel local optimization algorithm based on a 3D Voronoi diagram, which allows a clear definition of the proximity relations between sensors in 3D indoor environments. This proposed structure is integrated with an IndoorGML model to efficiently manage indoor environment components and their relations as well as the sensors in the network. To evaluate the proposed method, we compared our results with the Genetic Algorithm (GA) and the Covariance Matrix Adaptation Evolution Strategy (CMA-ES) algorithms. The results show that the proposed method achieved 98.86% coverage which is comparable to GA and CMA-ES algorithms, while also being about six times more efficient.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.017

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.243
Teacher spread0.227 · 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

Citations9
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSensorsSame topicIndoor and Outdoor Localization TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207