MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2033040950 · doi:10.1145/1641776.1641797

An exact path-loss density model for mobiles in a cellular system

2009· preprint· en· W2033040950 on OpenAlexaff
Mouhamed Abdulla, Yousef R. Shayan

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced MIMO Systems Optimization
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBase stationComputer scienceStochastic geometryPath lossTopology (electrical circuits)Position (finance)Stochastic processPath (computing)Perspective (graphical)Channel (broadcasting)Coverage probabilityCellular networkWirelessAlgorithmComputer networkTelecommunicationsMathematicsStatisticsArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In trying to emulate the spatial position of wireless nodes for purpose of analysis, we rely on stochastic simulation. And, it is customary, for mobile systems, to consider a base-station radiation coverage by an ideal cell shape. For cellular analysis, a hexagon contour is always preferred mainly because of its tessellating nature. Despite this fact, largely due to its intrinsic simplicity, in literature only random dispersion model for a circular shape is known. However, if considered, this will result an unfair nodes density specifically at the edges of non-circular contours. As a result, in this paper, we showed the exact random number generation technique required for nodes scattering inside a hexagon. Next, motivated from a system channel perspective, we argued the need for the exhaustive random mobile dropping process, and hence derived a generic close-form expression for the path-loss distribution density between a base-station and a mobile. Last, simulation was used to reaffirm the validity of the theoretical analysis using values from the new IEEE 802.20 standard.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.230
Teacher spread0.217 · 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
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

Citations6
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAdvanced MIMO Systems OptimizationFrench-language works237,207