MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2102833882 · doi:10.1109/glocom.2010.5683134

Dual Methods for Power Allocation for Radios Coexisting in Unlicensed Spectra

2010· article· en· W2102833882 on OpenAlexaff
Kandasamy Illanko, Alagan Anpalagan, D. Androutsos

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced MIMO Systems Optimization
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDuality gapMathematical optimizationDuality (order theory)Constraint (computer-aided design)Convergence (economics)Dual (grammatical number)Power (physics)Interference (communication)Boundary (topology)Computer scienceRate of convergenceSet (abstract data type)Topology (electrical circuits)Feasible regionMathematicsOptimization problemTelecommunicationsDiscrete mathematicsCombinatoricsChannel (broadcasting)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The power allocation that maximizes the sum rate of transceivers operating in the same frequency band is a difficult non-convex problem. Lack of a convex structure excludes the direct application of Lagrangian dual techniques as the duality gap might not be zero. This paper advances current knowledge by introducing three significant steps in finding a solution. First, we show that for transceivers operating under a total power constraint, the maximum sum rate occurs at the boundary of the feasible set formed by the hyper plane representing the power constraint. This conclusion is nontrivial considering that we are dealing with an interference limited system. Second, we prove that the duality gap is zero for this problem, despite the lack of concavity of the objective. We do this by showing that the maximum sum rate is concave in the power constraint. Third, we propose an iterative algorithm that finds the optimal power allocation by solving the dual problem. Simulation results are provided to support the theorems proven in the paper as well as to demonstrate the convergence of the algorithm to the global maximum sum rate. Results of the algorithm are also compared with solutions based on Game theory.

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 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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.686
Threshold uncertainty score0.423

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.327
Teacher spread0.310 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations11
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAdvanced MIMO Systems OptimizationFrench-language works237,207