MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2042926266 · doi:10.1109/tvt.2014.2320596

Channel Time Allocations and Handoff Management for Fair Throughput in Wireless Mesh Networks

2014· article· en· W2042926266 on OpenAlexaff
Lei Qin, Dongmei Zhao

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Vehicular Technology · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced Wireless Network Optimization
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHandoverComputer networkComputer scienceThroughputChannel allocation schemesChannel (broadcasting)Wireless mesh networkHeuristicWirelessOptimization problemWireless networkAlgorithmTelecommunications

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, we study a wireless mesh network (WMN), where a number of access points (APs) form a wireless infrastructure and provide communications to the mobile stations (MSs). Different APs share the same frequency channel. We study how to provide fair long-term throughput for the MSs while efficiently utilizing the channel resources through effective handoff management and channel timeline allocations, where the channel time is allocated at two levels: first among the APs and then among the MSs. An optimization problem is first formulated and solved. The optimum solution is based on the assumption of having global information about the channel conditions of all the MSs and cannot be easily implemented in a practical WMN. Two distributed schemes are proposed by decoupling the handoff management and channel time allocations. The HO-CA scheme performs heuristic handoff decisions for the MSs based on their link gains to nearby APs and then optimizes the channel time allocations through an iterative process. The CA-HO scheme allocates the channel time to individual APs based on interfering relationship of the APs and then allows the MSs to make handoff decisions based on possible utilities from nearby APs. In both schemes, individual APs solve a local optimization problem to allocate channel time for their associated MSs. Numerical results indicate that both the proposed schemes can achieve very good fairness and that the HO-CA scheme achieves higher throughput.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
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 head0.004
GPT teacher head0.193
Teacher spread0.189 · 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

Citations12
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Vehicular TechnologySame topicAdvanced Wireless Network OptimizationFrench-language works237,207