MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1603858677 · doi:10.1109/iccw.2015.7247382

Opportunistic Dual Metric Scheduling Algorithm for LTE uplink

2015· article· en· W1603858677 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced Wireless Network Optimization
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceTelecommunications linkScheduling (production processes)AlgorithmMetric (unit)Dual (grammatical number)Distributed computingComputer networkMathematical optimizationMathematicsEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

LTE uplink has two major scheduling algorithms, namely, Best CQI (BCQI) algorithm and Proportional Fairness (PF) algorithm. PF algorithm provides less system throughput than BCQI algorithm, however, unlike BCQI algorithm it considers users with poor channel condition for allocation process. In this paper, a new scheduling algorithm called as Opportunistic Dual Metric (ODM) Scheduling Algorithm is proposed for LTE uplink. The objective of the algorithm is to prioritize the users with good channel condition for resource allocation, at the same time not to starve the users with poor channel conditions. The proposed algorithm has two resource allocation matrices which are effectively used to allocate the resources to the users. The performance of ODM is measured in terms of throughput, fairness and transmit power. From the results it is observed that the proposed algorithm has better trade-off in terms of all the three performance parameters than PF scheduler and BCQI scheduler.

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 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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.123
Threshold uncertainty score0.503

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 science0.0000.000
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 head0.038
GPT teacher head0.260
Teacher spread0.223 · 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

Quick stats

Citations13
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAdvanced Wireless Network OptimizationFrench-language works237,207