MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2028641302 · doi:10.1109/glocom.2012.6503286

Pattern classification techniques for cooperative spectrum sensing in cognitive radio networks: SVM and W-KNN approaches

2012· article· en· W2028641302 on OpenAlexaff
Karaputugala Madushan Thilina, Kae Won Choi, Nazmus Saquib, Ekram Hossain

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicCognitive Radio Networks and Spectrum Sensing
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSupport vector machinePattern recognition (psychology)HyperplaneCognitive radioComputer scienceArtificial intelligenceClassifier (UML)Margin (machine learning)UnavailabilityReceiver operating characteristick-nearest neighbors algorithmStatistical classificationData miningMachine learningMathematicsStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We consider novel cooperative spectrum sensing (CSS) algorithms based on the pattern classification techniques for cognitive radio (CR) networks. In this regard, support vector machine (SVM) and weighted K-nearest-neighbor (KNN) classification techniques are implemented for CSS. The received signal strength at the CR users are treated as features and fed into the classifier to detect the availability of the primary user (PU). Each instance of PU activity (i.e., availability and unavailability) is categorized into positive and negative classes (respectively). In the case of SVM, for minimization of classification errors the support vectors are obtained by maximizing the margin between the separating hyperplane and data. Towards this end, we investigate the effect of different kernels through quantifying in terms of detection probability by representing the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves. Furthermore, weighted KNN classification technique is proposed for CSS and the corresponding weights are calculated by evaluating the area under ROC curve of each feature. Our comparative results clearly reveal that the proposed SVM and weighted KNN algorithms outperform the existing state-of-the-art pattern classification-based CSS techniques.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.058
GPT teacher head0.269
Teacher spread0.211 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations50
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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