MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2051336893 · doi:10.1109/icc.2010.5501926

Relay Selection and Max-Min Resource Allocation for Multi-Source OFDM-Based Mesh Networks

2010· article· en· W2051336893 on OpenAlexaff
Kianoush Hosseini, Raviraj Adve

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicCooperative Communication and Network Coding
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRelayOrthogonal frequency-division multiplexingSubcarrierComputer scienceSelection (genetic algorithm)MultiplexingResource allocationBlock (permutation group theory)Relay channelChannel (broadcasting)Synchronization (alternating current)Computer networkPower (physics)Mathematical optimizationTelecommunicationsMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We consider a multi-source mesh network of static access points wherein sources use decode-and-forward to cooperate with each other. All transmissions use orthogonal frequency division multiplexing (OFDM). Our objective is to maximize the minimum achievable rate across all flows. We find a tight upper bound on the performance of the subcarrier-based cooperation and show that selecting a single relay for each subcarrier is optimal for almost all subcarriers. The solution to the related optimization problem simultaneously solves the relay, power, and subcarrier assignment problems. Second, unlike previous works, we also consider relay selection for the entire OFDM block. This addresses the fact that, in addition to the synchronization problems caused, it is likely impractical for a relay to only decode a subset of subcarriers. We propose three selection-based cooperation schemes to relay the entire OFDM block with varying complexity. Simulation results show that under the COST-231 channel model, the performance of the simplest scheme almost exactly tracks that of an exhaustive search.

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)0.001
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.911
Threshold uncertainty score0.450

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.284
Teacher spread0.249 · 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

Citations13
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicCooperative Communication and Network CodingFrench-language works237,207