MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Flow Sharing Reliability in Energy Harvesting Wireless Sensing Networks

2024· article· en· W4402159420 on OpenAlexaff
Salwa Abougamila, Mohammed Elmorsy, Ehab S. Elmallah

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicEnergy Harvesting in Wireless Networks
Canadian institutionsMacEwan UniversityUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEnergy harvestingReliability (semiconductor)Computer scienceWirelessWireless sensor networkComputer networkFlow (mathematics)Reliability engineeringEnergy (signal processing)TelecommunicationsEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper introduces a new resource sharing problem in wireless sensor networks (WSNs) that employ energy harvesting for prolonged network uptime. The problem is on managing a given infrastructure of EH-WSNs by supporting concurrent applications. Each application is characterized by a set of traffic generating nodes, a sink node, and a minimum required traffic rate that should be periodically delivered to its sink node. The overall EH-WSN is modelled by a probabilistic graph where energy fluctuation over time in each node is described by a probability distribution and handled by adjusting the flow relaying capacity of a node. Performance of the obtained network management scheme is assessed by a reliability metric on the formulated probabilistic graph. We call the formulated problem the flow sharing reliability (FS-REL) problem in EH-WSNs. We present a heuristic algorithm to cope with the problem using ideas from minimum cost multi-commodity flows in networks and approximation of flow reliability using a factoring algorithm. We also present numerical results that give more insights into the problem and the proposed solution.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.003
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.200
Teacher spread0.193 · 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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicEnergy Harvesting in Wireless NetworksFrench-language works237,207