MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2149585730 · doi:10.1109/qshine.2004.33

On robust allocation policies in wireless heterogeneous networks

2004· article· en· W2149585730 on OpenAlexaff
A.-E.M. Taha, Hossam S. Hassanein, Hussein T. Mouftah

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced Wireless Network Optimization
Canadian institutionsUniversity of OttawaQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceWireless networkResource management (computing)Resource allocationWirelessRadio resource managementComputer networkResource (disambiguation)Heterogeneous networkWork (physics)Distributed computingRisk analysis (engineering)TelecommunicationsBusinessEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In fourth generation (4G) wireless networks, users are able to roam freely from one type of wireless access network to another while preserving the main characteristics of their connections. While various aspects of this vision have been discussed since mid 1990s, there remain fundamental challenges. Of these challenges is performing resource management across different access networks while considering various irregularities. This work advocates that any proposal for resource management in such networks should act reactively toward operational dynamicity while proactively allocating resources in a manner that sustains demand uncertainty. It shows how proactive allocations can be made using a formulation based on stochastic programming. The objective is to maximize the allocations while minimizing underutilization and rejection. It also discusses how a comprehensive proactive module can be realized. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first attempt to directly address joint resource management in wireless heterogeneous networks.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.015
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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.028

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.015
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.201
Teacher spread0.193 · 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
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

Citations32
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAdvanced Wireless Network OptimizationFrench-language works237,207