MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2061950483 · doi:10.1109/vtcfall.2012.6399328

Downlink Transmission Optimization Framework

2012· article· en· W2061950483 on OpenAlexaff
Ngọc-Dũng Đào, Aaron Callard, Hang Zhang, Ho Ting Cheng

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced MIMO Systems Optimization
Canadian institutionsHuawei Technologies (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceTelecommunications linkOptimization problemTransmitter power outputBase stationCellular networkTransmission (telecommunications)Interference (communication)Power optimizationLimit (mathematics)Disjoint setsComputer networkDistributed computingPower (physics)AlgorithmTelecommunicationsMathematicsTransmitterPower consumption

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper presents an optimization framework for downlink transmission parameters of mobile cellular systems. A typical network optimization approach is to divide the network into disjoint clusters of base-stations (BS). Optimization is then performed within each cluster for important parameters such as transmit power, precoder, etc. This approach is widely adopted in academic research and industrial standard bodies, e.g. 3GPP LTE-Advanced. While reducing the optimization complexity, this strategy suffers from a performance limit due to interference from the nodes outside cluster. We thus propose a framework to overcome this limit by allowing clusters to exchange their parameters and optimization information via low-rate and non-zero delay backhauls. System-level simulations for LTE downlink transmit power optimization show that the proposed optimization model, while having the low-complexity of cluster-based approach, could nearly achieve the performance of network-wise optimization. Therefore, this model is particularly suitable for optimization of 4G and beyond-4G cellular networks.

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: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.413
Threshold uncertainty score0.537

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.224
Teacher spread0.216 · 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

Citations2
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAdvanced MIMO Systems OptimizationFrench-language works237,207