MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2079729664 · doi:10.1109/glocom.2012.6503636

Low complexity energy efficient power allocation for green cognitive radio with rate constraints

2012· article· en· W2079729664 on OpenAlexaff
Kandasamy Illanko, Muhammad Naeem, Alagan Anpalagan, D. Androutsos

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicCognitive Radio Networks and Spectrum Sensing
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsKarush–Kuhn–Tucker conditionsCognitive radioMathematical optimizationComputer scienceEfficient energy useJoule (programming language)Interference (communication)Optimization problemComputational complexity theoryBase stationPower (physics)Channel (broadcasting)TelecommunicationsWirelessMathematicsElectrical engineeringAlgorithmEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper combines two emerging research areas: green communications and cognitive radio. A green cognitive radio network must be accountable for its energy expenditure. Energy expenditure of a cognitive base station is reduced by maximizing the bits/Joule energy efficiency (EE) of its transmissions. Any high complexity solution to this optimization problem will spend too much energy in computation. This paper presents a low complexity solution to the problem of finding the power allocation that maximizes the EE, while limiting the interference to the primary users and meeting the users' minimum rate requirements. The objective function of the optimization problem is not concave. Charnes-Cooper Transformation is applied to the problem to convert it into a concave program. KKT conditions were analyzed instead of the Lagrangian dual in lieu of low complexity solutions. A power allocation procedure that branches into two main cases depending on the channel gains is proposed. In the first case, an exact solution is obtained by solving a single non-linear equation that produces a common water level. In the second case, a near optimal solution in closed form is given. Simulation results supporting the analytical green solutions are presented.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.240
Teacher spread0.219 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations24
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicCognitive Radio Networks and Spectrum SensingFrench-language works237,207