MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1540231437 · doi:10.1109/icc.2009.5199090

Interference Aware Subcarrier Assignment for Throughput Maximization in OFDMA Wireless Relay Mesh Networks

2009· article· en· W1540231437 on OpenAlexaff
Preetha Thulasiraman, Xuemin Shen

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicCooperative Communication and Network Coding
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSubcarrierComputer scienceThroughputComputer networkRelayWireless mesh networkInterference (communication)Wireless networkWirelessDistributed computingOrthogonal frequency-division multiplexingChannel (broadcasting)Telecommunications

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The wireless relay mesh network (WRMN) is designed to provide robust and fault tolerant communications between relay and user nodes in broadband wireless networks. In this paper, we study interference aware resource allocation in OFDMA based WRMNs and the effects of spatial reuse on throughput. We propose an interference aware subcarrier assignment (IASA) algorithm to allocate subcarriers to links in the network such that interference is mitigated and throughput is maximized. The protocol interference model and spatial reuse are exploited to achieve the subcarrier assignment. We show that our IASA algorithm improves throughput compared to when subcarriers are used only once. However, overuse of a single subcarrier can have detrimental effects on network performance, therefore a balance must be achieved. In addition, using a maximum concurrent flow (MCF) approach, we show that under the IASA scheme of spatial reuse, throughput can be enhanced. We formulate the MCF as a linear program and solve it using dual optimization techniques. We compare our proposed algorithm with that of a graph coloring approach using a conflict graph and column generation to show that our throughput results are better than those obtained by the link coloring strategy.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.984
Threshold uncertainty score0.505

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.036
GPT teacher head0.287
Teacher spread0.251 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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".

Quick stats

Citations6
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicCooperative Communication and Network CodingFrench-language works237,207