MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2090184407 · doi:10.1109/ngmast.2009.37

Optimizations for Push-to-Talk in Wireless Networks

2009· article· en· W2090184407 on OpenAlexaff
Krish Pillai, Haseeb Akhtar

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicWireless Communication Networks Research
Canadian institutionsNortel (Canada)
FundersPTT Public Company Limited
KeywordsComputer scienceComputer networkWirelessTime division multiple accessSoftware deploymentWireless networkRobustness (evolution)Channel allocation schemesScheduling (production processes)TelecommunicationsEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Push-to-Talk or PTT is ideal for group communication in a cooperative work environment, since conversations tend to be terse, and single-point to multipoint communication is the norm. PTT is generally run using simple two-way devices communicating on a common channel. However, field experience has repeatedly exposed the need for better range and higher robustness, particularly since Departments of Public Safety and Medical Emergency Response Teams have come to rely heavily on this technology. PTT over a stable regulated carrier-grade wireless network such as 1xEVDO, GSM, or TDMA is therefore highly desirable. Unlike peer-peer half duplex communications and other low-cost alternatives run over unlicensed spectrum, providing PTT over regulated technologies such as 1xEVDO-Revision A is challenging. The foremost stumbling block is temporal resource allocation overheads during call setup. Call setup can take considerable time owing to network complexity and the state changes involved in setting up a Traffic Channel (TCH). This paper surveys a repertoire of optimization techniques that can be used to improve network performance metrics to acceptable limits for PTT deployment.

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)0.004
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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.309
Teacher spread0.284 · 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

Citations3
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicWireless Communication Networks ResearchFrench-language works237,207