2D-AoI: Age-of-Information of Distributed Sensors for Spatio-Temporal Processes
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 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 When the information from a particular sensor is outdated, fresh samples from other correlated sensors can be helpful.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.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 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