MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2081574256 · doi:10.1109/jsac.2012.121026

Jointly Optimal Channel and Power Assignment for Dual-Hop Multi-Channel Multi-User Relaying

2012· article· en· W2081574256 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Journal on Selected Areas in Communications · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicCooperative Communication and Network Coding
Canadian institutionsOntario Tech UniversityUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceRelayChannel (broadcasting)Mathematical optimizationOptimization problemComputational complexity theoryTransmission (telecommunications)Integer programmingHop (telecommunications)Channel allocation schemesDual (grammatical number)Computer networkPower (physics)WirelessAlgorithmTelecommunicationsMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We consider the problem of jointly optimizing channel pairing, channel-user assignment, and power allocation, to maximize the weighted sum-rate, in a single-relay cooperative system with multiple channels and multiple users. Common relaying strategies are considered, and transmission power constraints are imposed on both individual transmitters and the aggregate over all transmitters. The joint optimization problem naturally leads to a mixed-integer program. Despite the general expectation that such problems are intractable, we construct an efficient algorithm to find an optimal solution, which incurs computational complexity that is polynomial in the number of channels and the number of users. We further demonstrate through numerical experiments that the jointly optimal solution can significantly improve system performance over its suboptimal alternatives.

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.

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)0.001
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.872
Threshold uncertainty score0.995

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.100
GPT teacher head0.337
Teacher spread0.237 · 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