MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2135381110 · doi:10.1109/tit.2009.2016058

Fairness in Multiuser Systems With Polymatroid Capacity Region

2009· article· en· W2135381110 on OpenAlexaff
Mohammad Ali Maddah-Ali, Amin Mobasher, Amir K. Khandani

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Information Theory · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced Wireless Network Optimization
Canadian institutionsBlackberry (Canada)University of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceChannel capacityMathematicsTelecommunications

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

For a wide class of multiuser systems, a subset of capacity region which includes the corner points and the sum-capacity facet has a special structure known as polymatroid. Multiple-access channels with fixed input distributions and multiple-antenna broadcast channels are examples of such systems. Any interior point of the sum-capacity facet can be achieved by time-sharing among corner points or by an alternative method known as rate-splitting. The main purpose of this paper is to find a point on the sum-capacity facet which satisfies a notion of fairness among the active users. This problem is addressed in two cases: (i) where the complexity of achieving interior points is not feasible, and (ii) where the complexity of achieving interior points is feasible. For the first case, the corner point for which the minimum rate of the active users is maximized is desired. A simple greedy algorithm is introduced to find such an optimum corner point. In addition, it is shown for single-antenna Gaussian multiple-access channels, the resulting corner point is leximin maximal with respect to the set of the corner points. For the second case, the properties of the unique leximin maximal rate vector with respect to the polymatroid are reviewed. It is shown that the problems of deriving the time-sharing coefficients or rate-splitting scheme to attain the leximin maximal vector can be solved by decomposing the problem into some lower dimensional subproblems. In addition, a fast algorithm to compute the time-sharing coefficients to attain a general point on the sum-capacity facet is presented.

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)0.005
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.175
Teacher spread0.169 · 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
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

Citations51
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Information TheorySame topicAdvanced Wireless Network OptimizationFrench-language works237,207