Demo Data from EDBT 2026 / reviewers in the wild / expert
Francesco Nidito
dblp:51/6901
· DBLP profile ↗
4ranked-venue papers
1as first author
0since 2021 · last 2016
—ORCID · none
Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several
Databases, data management, data science and information retrieval · 2Systems, architecture and hardware · 1
Expertise — from the expertise taxonomy: the topics of the expert's papers under the CCF categories. A weight counts papers with recency: 1 for a paper about the topic, 0.3 when the topic is its context, halved every five years.
| Computer networks
1 paper |
Internet of things and sensor networks · 100% | |
| Databases, data mining, and information retrieval
1 paper |
Information retrieval · 77% Web and social media mining · 23% |
Topics — the 5 heaviest of 6, each with the papers that count most for it
| Topic | Weight | Papers | Last | Evidence papers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Information retrieval
ranking |
0.2 | 1 | 2016 | Ranking Financial Tweets · SIGIR 2016 |
Internet of things and sensor networks › wireless sensor network › data-centric storage
geographic hash table |
0.1 | 1 | 2011 | Dealing with Nonuniformity in Data Centric Storage for Wireless Sensor Networks · IEEE Trans. Parallel Distributed Syst. 2011 |
Internet of things and sensor networks › distributed storage
in-network storage |
0.1 | 1 | 2011 | Dealing with Nonuniformity in Data Centric Storage for Wireless Sensor Networks · IEEE Trans. Parallel Distributed Syst. 2011 |
Internet of things and sensor networks
wireless sensor network |
0.1 | 1 | 2011 | Dealing with Nonuniformity in Data Centric Storage for Wireless Sensor Networks · IEEE Trans. Parallel Distributed Syst. 2011 |
Internet of things and sensor networks › wireless sensor network › sensor deployment
nonuniform node distribution |
0.0 | 1 | 2011 | Dealing with Nonuniformity in Data Centric Storage for Wireless Sensor Networks · IEEE Trans. Parallel Distributed Syst. 2011 |
Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics
popularity factor analysis · 0.2simulation · 0.1distribution estimation · 0.1
| Year | Publication | Venue | Position |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2016 | Ranking Financial TweetsabstractRecently Twitter has complemented traditional newswire as a source of valuable Financial information. Although there is a rich body of published research dealing with the task of ranking tweets, there has been little published research dealing with ranking tweets within a Financial context. Here we consider whether popularity factors within Twitter can be used as a signal for popularity within the domain of financial experts. Our results suggest that what interests Finance is not the same as what interests the users of Twitter. Diego Ceccarelli, Francesco Nidito, Miles Osborne |
SIGIR | 2 |
| 2011 | Dealing with Nonuniformity in Data Centric Storage for Wireless Sensor NetworksabstractIn-network storage of data in Wireless Sensor Networks (WSNs) is considered a promising alternative to external storage since it contributes to reduce the communication overhead inside the network. Recent approaches to data storage rely on Geographic Hash Tables (GHT) for efficient data storage and retrieval. These approaches, however, assume that sensors are uniformly distributed in the sensor field, which is seldom true in real applications. Also they do not allow tuning the redundancy level in the storage according to the importance of the data to be stored. To deal with these issues, we propose an approach based on two mechanisms. The first is aimed at estimating the real network distribution. The second exploits data dispersal method based on the estimated network distribution. Experiments through simulation show that our approach approximates quite closely the real distribution of sensors and that our dispersal protocol sensibly reduces data losses due to unbalanced data load. Michele Albano, Stefano Chessa, Francesco Nidito, Susanna Pelagatti |
IEEE Trans. Parallel Distributed Syst. | 3 |
| 2007 | Q-NiGHT: Adding QoS to Data Centric Storage in Non-Uniform Sensor NetworksabstractStorage of sensed data in wireless sensor networks is essential when the sink node is unavailable due to failure and/or disconnections, but it can also provide efficient access to sensed data to multiple sink nodes. Recent approaches to data storage rely on Geographic Hash Tables for efficient data storage and retrieval. These approaches however do not support different QoS levels for different classes of data as the programmer has no control on the level of redundancy of data (and thus on data dependability). Moreover, they result in a great unbalance in the storage usage in each sensor, even when sensors are uniformly distributed. This may cause serious data losses, waste energy and shorten the overall lifetime of the sensornet. In this paper, we propose a novel protocol, Q-NiGHT, which (1) provides a direct control on the level of QoS in the data dependability, and (2) uses a strategy similar to the rejection method to build a hash function which scatters data approximately with the same distribution as sensors. The benefits of Q-NiGHT are assessed through a detailed simulation experiment, also discussed in the paper. Results show its good performance on different sensors distributions on terms of both protocol costs and load balance between sensors. 1 Michele Albano, Stefano Chessa, Francesco Nidito, Susanna Pelagatti |
MDM | 3 |
| 2007 | Fault-Tolerant and Load Balancing Localization of Services in Wireless Sensor NetworksabstractHeterogeneous wireless sensor networks are made up of different kinds of nodes. Some nodes, the sensors, are used as an interface to the physical environment. Other nodes act instead as servers, providing various services to the sensors. In this paper we define an architecture to enable the sensors to efficiently localize the services, and hence the servers. Our is a two-tier server architecture. The first tier is made up of the actual servers. The second tier is formed by nodes that are basically standard nodes (like the sensors). These nodes know the current position of the servers (they are called server locators). Sensors needing service query the server locators to find the corresponding service. The service locator sends a service position to the sensor. Finally, once got a hold of a server location, a sensor uses the service directly. Our server architecture provides load balancing (of queries to the servers) and is tolerant to server faults. Sensor nodes are endowed with caches to maintain the location of popular services. Experiments demonstrate the effectiveness of using caches at the sensor nodes. Francesco Nidito, Michele Battelli, Stefano Basagni |
VTC Fall | 1 |