MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2124364062 · doi:10.1109/aina.2015.160

Base Station Selection in M2M Communication Using Q-Learning Algorithm in LTE-A Networks

2015· article· en· W2124364062 on OpenAlexaff
Abbas Mohammed, Ahmed Shaharyar Khwaja, Alagan Anpalagan, Isaac Woungang

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicIoT Networks and Protocols
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBase stationComputer scienceLTE AdvancedComputer networkQuality of serviceSelection algorithmSelection (genetic algorithm)Random accessRadio access networkBase (topology)AlgorithmDistributed computingMachine learningTelecommunications link

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A major problem faced by machine type communication (MTC) devices in machine to machine (M2M) communication is the congestion and traffic overloading when incorporating into LTE Advanced networks. In this paper, we present an approach to tackle this problem by providing an efficient way for multiple access in the network and minimizing network overload. We consider the random access network (RAN) between the LTE base stations and MTC devices in the cell. We propose an unsupervised learning algorithm, based on Q-learning, as a means of base station selection scheme where MTC devices continuously adapt to changing network traffic and decide which base station is to be selected on the basis of QoS parameters. Simulation results demonstrate that the proposed algorithm helps MTC devices achieve better performance and, therefore, enhances the M2M communication performance.

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)0.004
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 score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.271
Teacher spread0.242 · 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

Citations18
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicIoT Networks and ProtocolsFrench-language works237,207