Two-Level Fractional Guard Channels for Priority Access in Cellular Systems
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
A two-level fractional guard channels (TLFGC) scheme to efficiently provide priority access for handoff calls over new calls in cellular systems is proposed. The switching between the levels is controlled by a dropped call. The first level has a small number of guard channels like the fixed guard channel (FGC) scheme, while the second level has a larger number of guard channels and a smaller number of fractional guard channels. An analytical formulation of the steady state probabilities, new call blocking probability, handoff call blocking probability, system utilization, probabilities in each level and the equivalent number of guard channels is presented. Numerical results show that the performance of TLFGC is almost the same as a fixed guard channels (FGC) scheme under light load. However, the advantage of the TLFGC scheme is demonstrated under heavy load where the handoff call blocking probability is much better than that of a FGC scheme, giving more priority and protection to handoff calls over new calls.
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 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| 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