Practical Scheduling Algorithms for Concurrent Transmissions in Rate-adaptive Wireless Networks
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Optimal scheduling for concurrent transmissions in rate-nonadaptive wireless networks is NP-hard. Optimal scheduling in rate-adaptive wireless networks is even more difficult, because, due to mutual interference, each flow's throughput in a time slot is unknown before the scheduling decision of that slot is finalized. The capacity bound derived for rate-nonadaptive networks is no longer applicable either. In this paper, we first formulate the optimal scheduling problems with and without minimum per-flow throughput constraints. Given the hardness of the problems and the fact that the scheduling decisions should be made within a few milliseconds, we propose two simple yet effective searching algorithms which can quickly move towards better scheduling decisions. Thus, the proposed scheduling algorithms can achieve high network throughput and maintain long-term fairness among competing flows with low computational complexity. For the constrained optimization problem involved, we consider its dual problem and apply Lagrangian relaxation. We then incorporate a dual update procedure in the proposed searching algorithm to ensure that the searching results satisfy the constraints. Extensive simulations are conducted to demonstrate the effectiveness and efficiency of the proposed scheduling algorithms which are found to achieve throughputs close to the exhaustive searching results with much lower computational complexity.
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 | 0.003 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".