MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

One Bit Feedback for CDF-Based Scheduling with Resource Sharing Constraints

2013· article· en· W2091359857 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 Transactions on Wireless Communications · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced Wireless Network Optimization
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceScheduling (production processes)Overhead (engineering)FadingLogarithmThroughputComputer networkBase stationWirelessChannel (broadcasting)Mathematical optimizationTelecommunicationsMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cumulative distribution function (CDF)-based scheduling (CS) is known to be effective in meeting the different channel access ratio (CAR) requirements of users in a multi-user wireless system. In this paper, we propose a one-bit-feedback scheme for CS (OBCS) to reduce the feedback overhead from users in a cell. In OBCS, each user sets its individual threshold to decide whether to send one-bit feedback to the base station (BS). The BS randomly generates numbers for all users based on their feedback behavior and selects a user who is assigned with the largest value. We further propose OBCS with reduced complexity, OBCS-RC, which employs a universal threshold for all users, and relieves the BS to generate random numbers only for the users who have sent feedback. Both OBCS and OBCS-RC inherit the properties of CS in meeting diverse CAR requirements of users in arbitrary fading channels. Extensive analytical and simulation results indicate that simply setting the OBCS-RC threshold to 0.1 is adequate for good throughput performance compared to OBCS with the optimal threshold for each user. Although OBCS and OBCS-RC induce a throughput loss due to the reduced feedback overhead, their throughput still grows in a double-logarithmic manner as CS in Nakagami-m channels when the number of users increases to infinity.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.812
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.238
Teacher spread0.213 · 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