MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1992198110 · doi:10.1049/iet-com.2013.1158

Markovian‐based framework for cooperative channel selection in cognitive radio networks

2014· article· en· W1992198110 on OpenAlexaff
Siavash Fazeli‐Dehkordy, Jamshid Abouei, Konstantinos N. Plataniotis, Subbarayan Pasupathy

Bibliographic record

VenueIET Communications · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicCognitive Radio Networks and Spectrum Sensing
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCognitive radioComputer scienceMarkov processSelection (genetic algorithm)Channel (broadcasting)Computer networkTelecommunicationsArtificial intelligenceWirelessMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The authors propose Markovian‐based spectrum sensing policies in a cognitive radio system that leverages past sensing outcomes of several cooperating secondary users (SUs) to decide which channel (of primary users – PUs) should be sensed by each SU at a given time. These policies are based on a new finite‐state channel model that captures the fading condition as well as the occupancy state for each primary channel. The multiuser extension of this model is useful when multiple spatially distributed SUs share their sensing outcomes. The proposed schemes allow the asynchronous sensing outcomes obtained by the SUs over different slots to be fused together and converted into a posteriori probabilities for the current states of the primary channels. As the detection threshold in a spectrum detector balances the trade‐off between the false‐alarm and miss probabilities for detecting primary signals in a single primary channel, a design parameter is introduced to allow the system designer to devise policies with different levels of aggressiveness. The authors evaluate the optimality and complexity of the proposed sensing policies and show that our schemes significantly increase secondary use of the spectrum and/or reduce interference with PUs compared to a random selection policy or a cooperative sensing policy based on a two‐state channel model.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.923
Threshold uncertainty score0.736

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.299
Teacher spread0.267 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations7
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIET CommunicationsSame topicCognitive Radio Networks and Spectrum SensingFrench-language works237,207