A Hierarchical Model for Bandwidth Management and Admission Control in Integrated IEEE 802.16/802.11 Wireless Networks
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this paper, we present a hierarchical bandwidth management and admission control framework for integrated IEEE 802.16/802.11 wireless networks. Developed based on a game-theoretic model, the framework aims to satisfy the quality of service (QoS) requirements of all the users in this integrated network. In particular, at the first level of this hierarchical model, the bandwidth allocation problem among the standalone subscriber stations (SSs) and the WLAN access points (APs)/routers is formulated as a bargaining game. Based on the allocated bandwidth to the SSs, groups of connections in different service types in the standalone SSs cooperate among each other at the second level of the game to share the bandwidth in a fair manner. The admission control for connections from the standalone SSs is devised based on the improvement in total utility of the corresponding service types. For the WLAN connections, estimated traffic load is used by an admission control game to decide whether a new connection from a WLAN node can be admitted or not.
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".