Downlink Scheduling and Resource Allocation for Cognitive Radio MIMO Networks
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cognitive radio is regarded as the ideal candidate for enhancing the efficiency of spectrum usage for next-generation wireless systems. In fact, this emerging technology allows unlicensed cognitive users to transmit over frequency bands that are initially owned by license holders through the use of dynamic spectrum sharing. In this paper, we propose a novel algorithm that efficiently solves the problem of spectrum sharing and user scheduling in a cognitive downlink multi-input-multi-output system (MIMO). We study the scenario where primary receivers do not allow any interference from a multiantenna cognitive base station, which serves cognitive users. Using graph theory, we model, formulate, and develop an algorithm that finds near-optimal spectrum sharing with the objective of approaching the maximum achievable secondary sum rate. Since the formulated graph-coloring problem is shown to be NP-hard, we design a low-complexity greedy algorithm. Following, we add the well-known proportional fairness to the proposed algorithm to ensure time-based fairness and to efficiently resolve the fairness/sum rate tradeoff. The problem is also formulated as a binary integer programming problem to find the optimal coloring solution. Computer simulations show that the proposed algorithm is able to achieve near-optimal performances with low computational complexity.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".