Energy-Efficient IoT Network Routing Model Based on Multi-Layer Clustering and Deep Learning
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 increasing numbers of sensors or actuators in the Internet of Things (IoT) networks make it essential to develop smart routing solutions whose goals are to extend the network's lifetime and keep reliable communication.In this paper, we present a new hybrid routing model based on multi-layer hierarchical clustering with the hybrid Convolutional Neural Network-Gated Recurrent Unit (CNN-GRU) model to find the most reasonable routing paths in a dynamic IoT environment.The CNN-GRU model utilizes a sequential sliding window of historical node attributes residual energy, hop count, and data rate for predicting the best energy-efficient next-hop node as closely as possible in pipeline.This predictability allows the protocol to rely less on static heuristics, and to adapt its behavior to varying network conditions.Observations from experiments also illustrate that our model achieves superior performance over other baseline protocols in terms of network lifetime of 134 rounds the first node death (FND) following 202 rounds the half-node death (HND), energy consumption of 0.041 J/round, packet delivery ratio of 96.8%, end-to-end delay of 244 ms, and the routing overhead of 28cp/round.These findings demonstrate that the proposed Multi-Layer Clustering with CNN-GRU model can enhance the energy efficiency, reliability, and scalability of IoT networks.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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