MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2140332083 · doi:10.1109/infcom.2011.5934911

Scheduling in wireless ad hoc networks with successive interference cancellation

2011· article· en· W2140332083 on OpenAlexaff
Shaohe Lv, Weihua Zhuang, Xiaodong Wang, Xingming Zhou

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicCooperative Communication and Network Coding
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceScheduling (production processes)Wireless ad hoc networkComputer networkTestbedWireless networkSingle antenna interference cancellationGreedy algorithmDistributed computingWirelessChannel (broadcasting)AlgorithmMathematicsMathematical optimizationTelecommunications

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Successive interference cancellation (SIC) is an effective way of multipacket reception (MPR) to combat interference in wireless networks. To understand the potential MPR advantages, we study link scheduling in an ad hoc network with SIC at the physical layer. The fact that the links detected sequentially by SIC are correlated at the receiver poses key technical challenges. We characterize the link dependence and propose simultaneity graph (SG) to capture the effect of SIC. Then interference number is defined to measure the interference of a link. We show that scheduling over SG is NP-hard and the maximum interference number bounds the performance of maximal greedy schemes. An independent set based greedy scheme is explored to efficiently construct a maximal feasible schedule. Moreover, with careful selection of link ordering, we present a scheduling scheme that improves the bound. The performance is evaluated by both simulations and measurements in testbed. The throughput gain is on average 40% and up to 120% over IEEE 802.11. The complexity of SG is comparable with that of conflict graph, especially when the network size is not large.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.048
GPT teacher head0.258
Teacher spread0.210 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations53
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicCooperative Communication and Network CodingFrench-language works237,207