Uplink Interference Analysis for Two-Tier Cellular Networks With Diverse Users Under Random Spatial Patterns
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Multi-tier architecture improves the spatial reuse of radio spectrum in cellular networks, but it introduces complicated heterogeneity in the spatial distribution of transmitters, which brings new challenges in interference analysis. In this work, we present a stochastic geometric model for evaluating the uplink interference in a two-tier network considering multi-type users and base stations. Each type of tier-1 users and tier-2 base stations are modeled as independent homogeneous Poisson point processes, and tier-2 users are modeled as locally non-homogeneous clustered Poisson point processes centered at tier-2 base stations. By applying a superposition-aggregation-superposition approach, we quantify the interference at both tiers. Our model is also able to capture the impact of two types of exclusion regions, where either tier-2 base stations or tier-2 users are restricted to avoid cross-tier interference. As an important application of this analytical model, an intensity planning scenario is investigated, in which we aim to maximize the total income of the network operator with respect to the intensities of tier-2 cells, under constraints on the outage probabilities of tier-1 and tier-2 users. The result of our interference analysis suggests that this maximization can be converted to a standard convex optimization problem. Finally, numerical studies further demonstrate the correctness of our analysis.
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 | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".