MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2125702314 · doi:10.1109/wcnc.1999.796942

A QoS management framework for 3G wireless networks

2003· article· en· W2125702314 on OpenAlexaff
Sanjoy Sen, Ajay Arunachalam, Kalyan Basu, M. Wernik

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicIPv6, Mobility, Handover, Networks, Security
Canadian institutionsNortel (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer networkComputer scienceQuality of serviceWireless networkRadio resource managementWi-Fi arrayWirelessWireless WANMobile QoSWireless distribution systemDistributed computingTelecommunicationsService providerService (business)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The wireless access is expected to be one of the key access technologies for providing IP services to the user, end-to-end seamlessly. The wireless network, as the "last hop" of the wireline IP network has its own unique set of complex characteristics. To improve the behavior of the wireless link susceptible to frequent error bursts (due to fading, shadowing etc.), various low layer (physical/link layer) techniques have to be used to map the service associated network level QoS parameters such as delay, jitter, BER and throughput to meet end-to-end IP performance. The motivation of this paper is two-fold: (i) to present some of the unique characteristics of the radio link and show what kind of flexibility of resource management and mapping techniques required to guarantee QoS over the wireless, and (ii) propose a framework for a wireless QoS agent. The wireless QoS agent, in a nutshell, will be responsible for mapping multimedia IP QoS requirements to radio link specific requirements. The wireless QoS agent will interwork with the IP QoS Manager framework within IETF such as diff-serv in core networks.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0040.003
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.002

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.216
Teacher spread0.209 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations8
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicIPv6, Mobility, Handover, Networks, SecurityFrench-language works237,207