MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2002551583 · doi:10.1002/wcm.904

Next generation mobility management: an introduction

2010· article· en· W2002551583 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueWireless Communications and Mobile Computing · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicIPv6, Mobility, Handover, Networks, Security
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British ColumbiaCarleton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMobility managementComputer networkComputer scienceHandoverWireless networkNetwork packetWirelessTelecommunications

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Mobility management, which includes location management and handoff management, is essential in cellular wireless networks to provide service to mobile users. Location management enables call delivery to mobile users, while handoff management maintains the connectivity of ongoing calls while users move between cells. In next generation networks, mobile users will avail themselves with terminals capable of accessing wireless networks employing multiple technologies, thus making the task of mobility management more challenging. This paper reviews recent developments in location management, and surveys methods for handoff management between heterogeneous systems. Methods for inter‐system handoffs in packet‐switched inter‐networks are discussed according to the protocol layer in which the handoffs take place, i.e., network layer, transport layer, and application layer. Open problems for mobility management in future wireless networks are also presented. Copyright © 2010 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

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.

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: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.951
Threshold uncertainty score0.881

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.251
Teacher spread0.231 · 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