MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4212872464 · doi:10.3390/electronics11040566

Intelligent Load-Balancing Framework for Fog-Enabled Communication in Healthcare

2022· article· en· W4212872464 on OpenAlexafffund
Swati Malik, Kamali Gupta, Deepali Gupta, Aman Singh, Muhammad Ibrahim, A. Ortega, Nitin Goyal, Habib Hamam

Bibliographic record

VenueElectronics · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicIoT and Edge/Fog Computing
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Moncton
FundersUniversité de Moncton
KeywordsInternet of ThingsComputer scienceFog computingLatency (audio)Low latency (capital markets)Health careBalance (ability)Embedded systemTelecommunicationsComputer network

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The present technological era significantly makes use of Internet-of-Things (IoT) devices for offering and implementing healthcare services. Post COVID-19, the future of the healthcare system is highly reliant upon the inculcation of Artificial-Intelligence (AI) mechanisms in its day-to-day procedures, and this is realized in its implementation using sensor-enabled smart and intelligent IoT devices for providing extensive care to patients relative to the symmetric concept. The offerings of such AI-enabled services include handling the huge amount of data processed and sensed by smart medical sensors without compromising the performance parameters, such as the response time, latency, availability, cost and processing time. This has resulted in a need to balance the load of the smart operational devices to avoid any failure of responsiveness. Thus, in this paper, a fog-based framework is proposed that can balance the load among fog nodes for handling the challenging communication and processing requirements of intelligent real-time applications.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.287
Teacher spread0.268 · 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

Citations34
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueElectronicsSame topicIoT and Edge/Fog ComputingFrench-language works237,207