MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2131951334 · doi:10.1109/glocom.2008.ecp.788

A Fair Subcarrier Allocation Algorithm for Cooperative Multiuser OFDM Systems with Grouped Users

2008· article· en· W2131951334 on OpenAlexaff
Hamed Rasouli, Sanam Sadr, Alagan Anpalagan

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicCooperative Communication and Network Coding
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSubcarrierComputer scienceTelecommunications linkOrthogonal frequency-division multiplexingBase stationResource allocationRelayComputer networkDiversity gainAlgorithmResource management (computing)MIMOChannel (broadcasting)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Dynamic resource allocation improves the performance of multiuser OFDM systems by exploiting multiuser diversity. Cooperative diversity is a technique where multiple users share their resources to realize a spatial diversity gain through cooperation. In this paper, the problem of downlink subcarrier allocation in a cooperative multiuser system is investigated. We assume a single-cell case where the base station has perfect knowledge of subchannel gains and all the mobile users are paired in cooperative groups. The mobile users in one cooperative group relay their partner data stream which is received from base station using a time division protocol. Based on the capacity contribution from the relaying terminal, a new parameter called cooperation coefficient is introduced. Considering the cooperation among users in assigning the subcarriers, a new subcarrier allocation algorithm is proposed. The performance of the proposed algorithm is then evaluated for different values of cooperation coefficients and is shown to maintain the same level of fairness but higher data rates compared with a similar algorithm which does not consider cooperation.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.965
Threshold uncertainty score0.535

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.043
GPT teacher head0.263
Teacher spread0.220 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations8
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicCooperative Communication and Network CodingFrench-language works237,207