MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1848767610 · doi:10.1109/wts.2014.6834994

Solving binary and continuous knapsack problems for radio resource allocation over High Altitude Platforms

2014· article· en· W1848767610 on OpenAlexaff
Ahmed S. Ibrahim, Attahiru Sule Alfa

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced Wireless Network Optimization
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsKnapsack problemLagrangian relaxationMulticastMathematical optimizationContinuous knapsack problemGeneralized assignment problemGreedy algorithmComputer scienceResource allocationInteger programmingChange-making problemColumn generationBenchmark (surveying)Optimization problemMathematicsDistributed computingComputer network

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, radio resource allocation for multicasting in OFDMA based High Altitude Platforms is considered. An optimization problem for the model described in the paper is formulated which turns out to be a Mixed Integer Non-Linear Program. Due to its high complexity, we use Lagrangian relaxation to dualize some constraint sets. The Lagrangian relaxed problem is then decomposed into two Lagrangian subproblems, one is a binary knapsack Lagrangian subproblem (BKLSP) and the other is continuous knapsack Lagrangian subproblem (CKLSP). The BKLSP is responsible for the assignment of the OFDMA subchannels and time slots to multicast sessions as well as user assignment to the multicast groups in a particular frame. The CKLSP is responsible for HAP power allocation to multicast sessions in the HAP service area. The two subproblems can be solved iteratively in search for a better solution, if there is any, for the Lagrangian problem. For the BKLSP we use two different solution algorithms, one based on dynamic programming and the other is a greedy algorithm. A greedy algorithm is also used for the CKLSP. The entire approach can be used to obtain bounds in a branch and bound algorithm for each of its nodes.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.019

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.189
Teacher spread0.184 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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

Citations6
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAdvanced Wireless Network OptimizationFrench-language works237,207