MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4298555389 · doi:10.48550/arxiv.1002.0013

Explicit Sensor Network Localization using Semidefinite Representations\n and Facial Reductions

2010· preprint· en· W4298555389 on OpenAlexaff
Nathan Krislock, Henry Wolkowicz

Bibliographic record

VenuearXiv (Cornell University) · 2010
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicAdvanced Optimization Algorithms Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSemidefinite programmingMathematicsRelaxation (psychology)EmbeddingEuclidean geometryMathematical optimizationComputer scienceAlgorithmArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The sensor network localization, SNL, problem in embedding dimension r,\nconsists of locating the positions of wireless sensors, given only the\ndistances between sensors that are within radio range and the positions of a\nsubset of the sensors (called anchors). Current solution techniques relax this\nproblem to a weighted, nearest, (positive) semidefinite programming, SDP,\ncompletion problem, by using the linear mapping between Euclidean distance\nmatrices, EDM, and semidefinite matrices. The resulting SDP is solved using\nprimal-dual interior point solvers, yielding an expensive and inexact solution.\n This relaxation is highly degenerate in the sense that the feasible set is\nrestricted to a low dimensional face of the SDP cone, implying that the Slater\nconstraint qualification fails. Cliques in the graph of the SNL problem give\nrise to this degeneracy in the SDP relaxation. In this paper, we take advantage\nof the absence of the Slater constraint qualification and derive a technique\nfor the SNL problem, with exact data, that explicitly solves the corresponding\nrank restricted SDP problem. No SDP solvers are used. For randomly generated\ninstances, we are able to efficiently solve many huge instances of this NP-hard\nproblem to high accuracy, by finding a representation of the minimal face of\nthe SDP cone that contains the SDP matrix representation of the EDM. The main\nwork of our algorithm consists in repeatedly finding the intersection of\nsubspaces that represent the faces of the SDP cone that correspond to cliques\nof the SNL problem.\n

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)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.022

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.196
GPT teacher head0.293
Teacher spread0.097 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations0
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuearXiv (Cornell University)Same topicAdvanced Optimization Algorithms ResearchFrench-language works237,207