MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2058448956 · doi:10.1109/glocomw.2013.6825000

Radio resource allocation for multicast transmissions over High Altitude Platforms

2013· article· en· W2058448956 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced Wireless Network Optimization
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMulticastComputer scienceSubgradient methodMathematical optimizationSimplex algorithmResource allocationLinear programmingLinear programming relaxationOptimization problemLagrangian relaxationInteger programmingRelaxation (psychology)Computer networkAlgorithmMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, we study radio resource allocation (RRA) for multicasting in OFDMA based High Altitude Platforms (HAPs). We formulate an optimization problem for a scenario in which different sessions are multicasted to user terminals (UTs) across HAP service area. We then solve it to find the best allocation of HAP resources such as radio power, sub-channels, and time slots. The objective is to maximize the number of UTs that receive the requested multicast streams in the HAP service area in a given OFDMA frame. The optimization problem comes out to be a Mixed Integer Non-Linear Program (MINLP). Due to the high complexity of the problem and lack of special structures, we believe that breaking it into two easier subproblems and iterating between them to achieve convergence can lead to an acceptable solution. Subproblem 1 turns out to be a Binary Integer Linear Program (BILP) of no explicitly noticeable structure and therefore Lagrangian relaxation is used to dualize some constraints to get a BILP with some special structure that is easy to solve. The subgradient method is used to solve for the dual variables in the dual problem for three proposed methods to get the tightest bound in each. The obtained bounds can be used in a branch and bound (BnB) algorithm as its bounding subroutine at each node. Subproblem 2 turns out to be a simple linear program (LP) for which the simplex algorithm can be used to solve the subproblem to optimality. This paper focuses on subproblem 1 and its proposed solution techniques. In the results section of this paper, we compare the solution goodness for each method versus the well known bounding technique used in BnB which is linear program (LP) relaxation.

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.

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 score0.831
Threshold uncertainty score0.438

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.205
Teacher spread0.199 · 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

Quick stats

Citations4
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAdvanced Wireless Network OptimizationFrench-language works237,207