MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2066086342 · doi:10.1109/wimob.2013.6673416

Efficient user and power allocation in femtocell networks

2013· article· en· W2066086342 on OpenAlexaff
Zoubeir Mlika, Mathew Goonewardena, Wessam Ajib, Halima Elbiaze

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced MIMO Systems Optimization
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMacrocellFemtocellComputer scienceHeuristicMathematical optimizationSignal-to-interference-plus-noise ratioBase stationTime complexityTransmitter power outputMaximizationCellular networkFrequency allocationComputational complexity theoryInteger programmingPower (physics)Computer networkAlgorithmMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper we consider the problem of user assignment and power allocation in a small cell environment which is one of the most important problems in present wireless cellular network research. We consider a two-tier cellular network where randomly dispersed overlay femtocell base stations (FBSs) coexist with a macrocell. Our objective is to maximize the total number of users served by the FBSs while satisfying their signal to noise and interference (SINR) requirements. This problem is known to be NP-Hard and hence there is no known optimal solution to solve it in polynomial time. First we formulate the problem of maximization of allocated users under SINR constraints with constant transmit power as an integer programming problem. We provide two heuristic polynomial time algorithms. Then we propose a third algorithm for joint power and user allocation. We evaluate the complexity of the proposed algorithms and furthermore compare the results against the brute force optimal solution and a basic random user assignment through simulations. The results demonstrate the performance and the efficiency of the proposed algorithms. We see in the simulation that the best proposed heuristic for maximizing the number of assigned users is only 3% less than the optimal while reducing the power consumption below that of the optimal user assignment algorithm.

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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.800
Threshold uncertainty score0.217

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 head0.004
GPT teacher head0.182
Teacher spread0.178 · 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
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

Citations1
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAdvanced MIMO Systems OptimizationFrench-language works237,207