MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4409985446 · doi:10.1109/iotm.001.2400125

Generative AI for Energy Harvesting Internet of Things Network: Fundamental, Applications, and Opportunities

2025· article· en· W4409985446 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Internet of Things Magazine · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicEnergy Harvesting in Wireless Networks
Canadian institutionsMemorial University of Newfoundland
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGenerative grammarInternet of ThingsEnergy harvestingComputer scienceThe InternetArtificial intelligenceEnergy (signal processing)World Wide WebMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Internet of Things (IoT) devices are typically powered by small-sized batteries with limited energy storage capacity, requiring regular replacement or recharging. To reduce costs and maintain connectivity in IoT networks, energy harvesting technologies are regarded as a promising solution. Notably, due to its robust analytical and generative capabilities, generative artificial intelligence (GenAl) has demonstrated significant potential in optimizing energy harvesting networks. Therefore, we discuss key applications of GenAl in improving energy harvesting IoT networks in this article. Specifically, we first review the key technologies of GenAI and the architecture of energy harvesting IoT networks. Then, we show how GenAI can address different problems to improve the performance of the energy harvesting IoT networks. Subsequently, we present a case study of unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV)-enabled data col-lection and energy transfer. The case study shows distinctively the necessity of energy harvesting technology and verify the effectiveness of GenAI-based methods. Finally, we discuss some import-ant open directions.

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 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)0.000
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.925
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.245
Teacher spread0.225 · 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