Bibliographic record
Abstract
In the literature, many wireless local area network (WLAN) performance estimations are done with the assumption of uniformly distributed stations (STAs). On the contrary, in practice STAs are distributed unevenly among access points (APs) in the network, causing hot spots and under utilized APs (Bejerano, Han, and Li, 2004). Considering a WLAN is made up of multiple APs, having some APs carrying excessive loads (i.e. hot-spots) degrades both considered APs as well as the overall network performance. The system performance can be improved by associating incoming STAs effectively throughout the network, in a sense to balance the network load evenly between APs. Currently employed user association method in IEEE 802.11 WLANs considers only the received signal strength of APs at STAs, and associates STAs to the closest (in signal strength sense) AP ignoring its load. Novel user association algorithms are required in order to increase the network performance. In this work, a new association algorithm is proposed taking into consideration not only the received signal strength of the APs but also AP loadings. Proposed algorithm predicts the effective data rate of the connection and avoids the congestion. In hot-spot areas, system throughput improvement up to 90% is observed compared to current association algorithms
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 | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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".