Handoff Rate and Coverage Analysis in Multi-Tier Heterogeneous Networks
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper analyzes the impact of user mobility in multi-tier heterogeneous networks. We begin by obtaining the handoff rate for a mobile user in an irregular cellular network with the access point locations modeled as a homogeneous Poisson point process. The received signal-to-interference-ratio (SIR) distribution along with a chosen SIR threshold is then used to obtain the probability of coverage. To capture potential connection failures due to mobility, we assume that a fraction of handoffs result in such failures. Considering a multi-tier network with orthogonal spectrum allocation among tiers and the maximum biased average received power as the tier association metric, we derive the probability of coverage for two cases: 1) the user is stationary (i.e., handoffs do not occur, or the system is not sensitive to handoffs); 2) the user is mobile, and the system is sensitive to handoffs. We derive the optimal bias factors to maximize the coverage. We show that when the user is mobile, and the network is sensitive to handoffs, both the optimum tier association and the probability of coverage depend on the user's speed; a speed-dependent bias factor can then adjust the tier association to effectively improve the coverage, and hence system performance, in a fully-loaded network.
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 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
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".