Spectrum Sensing, Clustering Algorithms, and Energy-Harvesting Technology for Cognitive-Radio-Based Internet-of-Things Networks
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The aim of this systematic review was to identify the correlations between spectrum sensing, clustering algorithms, and energy-harvesting technology for cognitive-radio-based internet of things (IoT) networks in terms of deep-learning-based, nonorthogonal, multiple-access techniques. The search results and screening procedures were configured with the use of a web-based Shiny app in the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analysis (PRISMA) flow design. AMSTAR, DistillerSR, Eppi-Reviewer, PICO Portal, Rayyan, and ROBIS were the review software systems harnessed for screening and quality assessment, while bibliometric mapping (dimensions) and layout algorithms (VOSviewer) configured data visualization and analysis. Cognitive radio is pivotal in the utilization of an adequate radio spectrum source, with spectrum sensing optimizing cognitive radio network operations, opportunistic spectrum access and sensing able to boost the efficiency of cognitive radio networks, and cooperative spectrum sharing together with simultaneous wireless information and power transfer able increase spectrum and energy efficiency in 6G wireless communication networks and across IoT devices for efficient data exchange.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it