MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2095691144 · doi:10.1109/tmc.2006.85

Queue-aware uplink bandwidth allocation and rate control for polling service in IEEE 802.16 broadband wireless networks

2006· article· en· W2095691144 on OpenAlexaff
Dusit Niyato, Ekram Hossain

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Mobile Computing · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced Wireless Network Optimization
Canadian institutionsUniversity of WinnipegUniversity of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPollingComputer networkComputer scienceWireless broadbandQuality of serviceBandwidth allocationWireless networkWirelessTelecommunications

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

IEEE 802.16 standard defines the air interface specifications for broadband access in wireless metropolitan area networks. Although the medium access control signaling has been well-defined in the IEEE 802.16 specifications, resource management and scheduling, which are crucial components to guarantee quality of service performances, still remain as open issues. In this paper, we propose adaptive queue-aware uplink bandwidth allocation and rate control mechanisms in a subscriber station for polling service in IEEE 802.16 broadband wireless networks. While the bandwidth allocation mechanism adaptively allocates bandwidth for polling service in the presence of higher priority unsolicited grant service, the rate control mechanism dynamically limits the transmission rate for the connections under polling service. Both of these schemes exploit the queue status information to guarantee the desired quality of service (QoS) performance for polling service. We present a queuing analytical framework to analyze the proposed resource management model from which various performance measures for polling service in both steady and transient states can be obtained. We also analyze the performance of best-effort service in the presence of unsolicited grant service and polling service. The proposed analytical model would be useful for performance evaluation and engineering of radio resource management alternatives in a subscriber station so that the desired quality of service performances for polling service can be achieved. Analytical results are validated by simulations and typical numerical results are presented.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
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 score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.211
Teacher spread0.205 · 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

Citations148
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Mobile ComputingSame topicAdvanced Wireless Network OptimizationFrench-language works237,207