MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1777379964 · doi:10.1109/tit.2013.2281713

Asymptotic Scheduling Gains in Point-to-Multipoint Cognitive Networks

2013· article· en· W1777379964 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Information Theory · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicCognitive Radio Networks and Spectrum Sensing
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsScheduling (production processes)Telecommunications linkChannel (broadcasting)Lemma (botany)Cognitive radioAsymptotic analysisInterference (communication)Channel allocation schemes

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We study simultaneous channel sharing of collocated primary and secondary networks at three different levels of coexistence: pure interference, asymmetric, and symmetric. At the pure interference level, both networks operate simultaneously in the same frequency band regardless of their interference to each other. At the asymmetric level, only the secondary network performs user scheduling based on various degrees of interference and channel gain knowledge while at the symmetric level both networks do so. Using a lemma on the asymptotic behavior of the largest order statistic and a proposition on the asymptotic sum of lower order statistics, we derive asymptotic primary and secondary sum-rates under simultaneous channel sharing at each coexistence level. As a baseline comparison, time-division (TD) channel sharing is considered. While maintaining the same asymptotic primary sum-rate, the asymptotic secondary sum-rate under TD is compared with that achievable by simultaneous channel sharing. The results indicate that simultaneous channel sharing at both asymmetric and symmetric co-existence levels can outperform TD. Furthermore, this enhancement is achievable asymptotically when user scheduling in uplink mode is based only on the interference gains to the opposite network and not on a network's own channel gains.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.967
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.003
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.010
GPT teacher head0.228
Teacher spread0.219 · 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.

Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations1
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Information TheorySame topicCognitive Radio Networks and Spectrum SensingFrench-language works237,207