MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2144774445 · doi:10.1109/glocom.2005.1578203

Connection admission control algorithms for OFDM wireless networks

2005· article· en· W2144774445 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueGLOBECOM '05. IEEE Global Telecommunications Conference, 2005. · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced Wireless Network Optimization
Canadian institutionsUniversity of WinnipegUniversity of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsConnection (principal bundle)Queueing theoryComputer scienceAdmission controlQueueComputer networkOrthogonal frequency-division multiplexingNetwork packetWirelessScheme (mathematics)Wireless networkAlgorithmReal-time computingMathematicsTelecommunicationsChannel (broadcasting)Quality of service

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We present queueing analysis for two connection admission control (CAC) schemes for OFDM wireless networks. The first one is a threshold-based CAC scheme in which admissibility for a new connection is determined based on a certain threshold and the number of ongoing connections. The second scheme uses the information on queue status to determine the probability to accept an incoming call. The connection-level and the packet-level performance measures for both CAC schemes are obtained from the queueing analytical models. Typical numerical results based on the proposed model are presented which provide interesting insights on the behavior of these two different CAC schemes. Also, simulation results are presented to validate the analytical results

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.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.924
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.268
Teacher spread0.249 · 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