MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

LEMoNet; Low Energy Wireless Sensor Network Design for Data Center Monitoring

2019· article· en· W4253329046 on OpenAlexaff
Chenhe Li, Jun Li, Mehdi Jarizadeh, Ghada Badawy, Rong Zheng

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicEnergy Efficient Wireless Sensor Networks
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWireless sensor networkComputer scienceDefault gatewayEnergy consumptionBattery (electricity)Data centerReal-time computingReliability (semiconductor)WirelessEfficient energy useComputer networkEmbedded systemPower (physics)Electrical engineeringEngineeringTelecommunications

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Today's data centers (DCs) consume up to 3% of the energy produced worldwide, much of which is wasted due to over-cooling and under utilization of IT equipment. This wastage in part stems from the lack of real-time visibility of fine-grained thermal distribution in DCs. Wireless sensing is an ideal candidate for DC monitoring as it is cost-effective, facility-friendly, and can be easily re-purposed. In this paper, we develop LEMoNet, a novel low-energy battery operated wireless sensor network design for monitoring DCs. It employs a two-tier network architecture and a multi-mode data exchange protocol to balance the trade-offs between low power consumption and high data reliability. We have evaluated the performance of LEMoNet by deploying custom-designed sensor and gateway nodes in a production DC as well as through extensive simulation studies in networks of various sizes. We show experimentally that LEMoNet achieves an average data yield over 98 % in the production DC. It scales well in large and dense networks in large-scale simulations. Under normal operations with one temperature and one humidity reading every thirty seconds, the battery lifetime of LEMoN et sensor nodes is projected to be 14.9 years on a single lithium coin battery.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.541
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

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 communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0030.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.250
Teacher spread0.213 · 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.

Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations4
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicEnergy Efficient Wireless Sensor NetworksFrench-language works237,207