MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2034399071 · doi:10.1109/glocom.2014.7037521

Analysis of multi-tier uplink cellular networks with energy harvesting and flexible cell association

2014· article· en· W2034399071 on OpenAlexaff
Ahmed Hamdi Sakr, Ekram Hossain

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced MIMO Systems Optimization
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTelecommunications linkBase stationComputer scienceEnergy harvestingCellular networkStochastic geometryInterference (communication)Computer networkEnergy (signal processing)Efficient energy useSignal-to-noise ratio (imaging)Coverage probabilityElectronic engineeringReal-time computingChannel (broadcasting)TelecommunicationsElectrical engineeringEngineeringMathematicsStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We model and analyze a K-tier uplink cellular network with flexible cell association where all transmissions are powered by energy harvesting from ambient interference. Each cellular user transmits data to the corresponding base station (BS) only when the amount of energy harvested is sufficient to perform channel inversion towards the serving BS. Furthermore, the data transmitted can be successfully decoded only when the signal-to-interference-plus-noise ratio (SINR) at the receiver is above a predefined threshold. With flexible cell association, users are not necessarily associated with their nearest BS where a different bias factor is added to each network tier. We use tools from stochastic geometry to evaluate the performance of the proposed system model in terms of the coverage probability of a generic user associated with the k-th tier. We show that energy harvesting can be a reliable source to power cellular users with short-range communication, e.g., small cell users. In addition, we show that energy harvesting can achieve high coverage performance by optimizing different network parameters such as the BS receiver sensitivity as well as the bias factors.

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: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.938
Threshold uncertainty score0.364

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.176
Teacher spread0.171 · 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
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

Citations17
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAdvanced MIMO Systems OptimizationFrench-language works237,207