MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2092425861 · doi:10.1002/wcm.372

Scheduling with base station diversity and fairness analysis for the downlink of CDMA cellular networks

2006· article· en· W2092425861 on OpenAlexafffund
Mehrdad Dianati, Xuemin Shen, Kshirasagar Naik

Bibliographic record

VenueWireless Communications and Mobile Computing · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced Wireless Network Optimization
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsComputer scienceBase stationScheduling (production processes)Computer networkMaximum throughput schedulingTelecommunications linkFadingNetwork packetFairness measureCellular networkCode division multiple accessWireless networkDiversity combiningWirelessRound-robin schedulingChannel (broadcasting)Fair-share schedulingThroughputQuality of serviceTelecommunicationsMathematical optimizationMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Efficient packet scheduling in CDMA cellular networks is a challenging problem due to the time variant and stochastic nature of the channel fading process. Selection diversity is one of the most effective techniques utilizing random and independent variations of diverse channels to improve the performance of communication over fading channels. In this paper, we propose two packet scheduling schemes exploiting base station selection diversity in the downlink of CDMA cellular networks. The proposed schemes rely on the limited instantaneous channel state information (CSI) to select the best user from the best serving base station at each time slot. This technique increases the system throughput by increasing multiuser diversity gain and reducing the effective interference among adjacent base stations. Results of Monte Carlo simulations are given to demonstrate the improvement of system throughput using the proposed scheduling schemes. In addition, we investigate fairness issue of wireless scheduling schemes. Due to different characteristics of wireless scheduling schemes, the existing fairness indexes may result in misleading comparison among different schemes. We propose a new fairness index to compare the overall satisfaction of the network users for different scheduling schemes. Copyright © 2006 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.013
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 score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.028

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.013
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.210
Teacher spread0.200 · 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

Citations4
Published2006
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueWireless Communications and Mobile ComputingSame topicAdvanced Wireless Network OptimizationFrench-language works237,207