Mobility model for heterogeneous wireless networks and its application in common radio resource management
Bibliographic record
Abstract
User distribution and mobility behaviour vary based on environment types and characteristics. Heterogeneous wireless networks (HWNs) are deployed to utilise these characteristics and serve users with better quality. For efficient resource management in HWN environment, an understanding of multi-mode user mobility behaviour is paramount. Here, a multi-mode user mobility model is proposed in the context of wireless local area network (WLAN) coverage in the hotspot, overlaid on a macrocell of wireless wide area network (WWAN). An expression for microcell residence time of multi-mode users in HWNs is derived, based on the cell residence time in the constituting WLAN and WWAN. The boundary-crossing probabilities of moving into microcell, moving out of microcell and moving out of macrocell during a call for different types of hotspot topologies are also derived analytically. The numerical results obtained using the analytical expressions for boundary-crossing probability are validated by simulation results. The significance of the proposed mobility model is demonstrated through its application in common radio resource management (CRRM). Numerical results show that the mobility-based CRRM scheme exhibits a lower rate of unnecessary vertical handoffs than that achieved by the ‘WLAN ‘if coverage’ scheme that does not use mobility information for resource management.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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.
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".