Optimal and Approximate Mobility-Assisted Opportunistic Scheduling in Cellular Networks
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper considers the problem of scheduling multiple users in the downlink of a time-slotted cellular data network. For such a network, opportunistic scheduling algorithms improve system performance by exploiting time variations of the radio channel. We present novel optimal and approximate opportunistic scheduling algorithms that combine channel fluctuation and user mobility information in their decision rules. The algorithms modify the opportunistic scheduling framework of Liu et al., (1993) with dynamic constraints for fairness. These fairness constraints adapt according to the user mobility. The adaptation of constraints in the proposed algorithms implicitly results in giving priority to the users that are in the most favorable locations. The optimal algorithm is an offline algorithm that precomputes constraint values according to a known mobility model. The approximate algorithm is an online algorithm that relies on the future prediction of the user mobility locations in time. We show that the use of mobility information in opportunistic scheduling increases channel capacity. We also provide analytical bounds on the performance of the approximate algorithm using the fundamental inequality of Dyer et al., (1986) for linear programs. Simulation results on high data rate (HDR) illustrate the usefulness of the proposed schemes for elastic traffic and macrocell structures
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".