MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2028139978 · doi:10.1109/wcnc.2013.6555253

Robust power control in cognitive radio networks with channel uncertainty

2013· article· en· W2028139978 on OpenAlexaff
Shimin Gong, Ping Wang, Yongkang Liu, Weihua Zhuang

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicCognitive Radio Networks and Spectrum Sensing
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCognitive radioChannel (broadcasting)FadingComputer scienceControl channelPower controlChannel state informationInterference (communication)Robustness (evolution)Mathematical optimizationPower (physics)Computer networkTelecommunicationsMathematicsWirelessBase station

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In cognitive radio networks, channel information is desired by unlicensed secondary users (SUs) to perform effective power control so as to avoid undue interference to licensed primary users (PUs). However, in general, there is no regular information exchange between PUs and SUs, which implies that SUs are unable to obtain up-to-date channel information at the PU side. Besides, the small-scale fading, in addition to shadowing, brings great uncertainty in SUs' channel estimation. In this paper, we consider limited information exchange between SUs and PUs, and study the impact of channel uncertainty on SUs' throughput performance with power control. We model the uncertain channel gain to be a random variable following a state-dependent probability distribution function, and design a power control method that is robust against the channel uncertainty. We formulate the robust power control problem as a chance constrained robust optimization and solve it by an iterative algorithm. Numerical results show that the proposed power control can provide better protection for PUs than existing methods that overlook the uncertainty in channel measurement.

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)0.000
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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.970
Threshold uncertainty score0.694

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.205
Teacher spread0.192 · 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
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

Citations2
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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