2D-AoI: Age-of-Information of Distributed Sensors for Spatio-Temporal Processes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The freshness of sensor data is critical for all types of cyber-physical systems. An established measure for quantifying data freshness is the Age-of-Information (AoI), which has been the subject of extensive research. Recently, there has been increased interest in multi-sensor systems: redundant sensors producing samples of the same physical process, sensors such as cameras producing overlapping views, or distributed sensors producing correlated samples. When the information from a particular sensor is outdated, fresh samples from other correlated sensors can be helpful. To quantify the utility of distant but correlated samples, we put forth a two-dimensional (2D) model of AoI that takes into account the sensor distance in an age-equivalent representation. Since we define 2D-AoI as equivalent to AoI, it can be readily linked to existing AoI research, especially on parallel systems. We consider physical phenomena modeled as spatio-temporal processes and derive the 2D-AoI for different Gaussian covariance kernels. For a basic exponential product kernel, we find that spatial distance causes an additive offset of the AoI, while for other kernels the effects of spatial distance are more complex and vary with time. Using our methodology, we evaluate the 2D-AoI of different spatial topologies and sensor densities.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.013 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".