MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2118106390 · doi:10.1109/iwcmc.2008.140

A Traffic Specific Energy Saving Strategy for Mobile Stations in Wireless Networks

2008· article· en· W2118106390 on OpenAlexaff
Zixin Liu, Jalal Almhana, R. McGorman

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicGreen IT and Sustainability
Canadian institutionsNortel (Canada)Université de Moncton
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSleep modeComputer scienceScheduleWeibull distributionIdleWirelessSleep (system call)Real-time computingPower (physics)Computer networkInterval (graph theory)Mobile telephonyMode (computer interface)Mobile radioTelecommunicationsPower consumption

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In wireless communication networks, power saving is an important issue and sleep mode is usually used to prolong battery life time of mobile devices; when there is no data to transmit or receive, a mobile device can switch to sleep mode periodically. Apparently, there is a trade-off between power saving and response delay, and the performance of a power saving mechanism depends on the user traffic characteristics and how well the sleep interval updating mechanism can capture the termination time of an idle period. In essence, sleep interval updating is a standard inspection problem in operational research. In this paper, we model the idle durations of a mobile device by Weibull distributions and propose to use the density based inspection strategy of Weibull distribution to schedule the sleep intervals of mobile devices. The proposed scheme is compared with the power saving mechanism of IEEE802.16e under a wide variety traffic conditions. Numerical examples are provided to show the effectiveness of the proposed scheme.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.218
Teacher spread0.201 · 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
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

Citations3
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicGreen IT and SustainabilityFrench-language works237,207