MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1972203946 · doi:10.1109/iccw.2014.6881271

A set cover based algorithm for Cell Switch-Off with different cell sorting criteria

2014· article· en· W1972203946 on OpenAlexaff
Tamer Beitelmal, Halim Yanıkömeroğlu

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced MIMO Systems Optimization
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSortingComputer scienceBenchmark (surveying)AlgorithmCover (algebra)Set (abstract data type)Cell sortingGreedy algorithmSorting algorithmEnergy (signal processing)Energy consumptionCellMathematicsEngineeringBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The traffic distribution in cellular networks fluctuates in both time and space. This fluctuation results in some base stations (cells) being underutilized in light traffic conditions. Despite being underutilized, these cells still consume substantial amount of their energy. One possible technique to preserve this wasted energy is implementing the Cell Switch-Off (CSO) approach. In this approach, a common practice is to switch off cells based on their current loads. However, not only the cell load affects the switch-off procedure but also the order in which the cells are switched off (cell sorting). Hence, in this paper, we investigated different cell sorting criteria. The results illustrated that more energy can be preserved when sorting cells based on the number of users they can serve compared with the case of sorting cells based on their current load. To implement the CSO approach, we proposed a centralized greedy-add algorithm devised from the well known set cover problem. Simulation results showed that our algorithm outperformed the benchmark algorithm when the number of users per cell is large. The two algorithms were compared using the Urban-Micro (UMi) evaluation scenario.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.215
Teacher spread0.207 · 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

Citations20
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAdvanced MIMO Systems OptimizationFrench-language works237,207