A Maximal Power-Conserving Scheduling Algorithm for Broadband Wireless Networks
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The limitation on the battery lifetime has been a critical issue for the advancement of mobile computing. Different types of power-saving techniques have been proposed in various fields. In order to provide feasible energy-conserving mechanism for the mobile subscriber stations (MSSs), three power-saving types have been proposed for the IEEE 802.16e broadband wireless networks. However, these power-saving types are primarily targeting for the cases with a single connection between the base station (BS) and the MSS. With the existence of multiple connections, the power efficiency obtained by adopting the conventional scheduling algorithm can be severely degraded. In this paper, a maximal power-conserving (MPC) scheduling algorithm is proposed to consider the aggregated effect from the multiple connections to the power efficiency. Moreover, the quality-of-service (QoS) constraints from both the downlink and the uplink traffic are employed in the design of the MPC algorithm in order to facilitate the corresponding MSS to fulfill its QoS requirements in both directions. Numerical results show that the proposed MPC scheduling algorithm outperforms the conventional 802.16e power-saving mechanism, especially under the multi-connection scenarios.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".