MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2150432689 · doi:10.1109/wcnc.2010.5506611

Secondary Wireless Mesh Network Design Using Leased Frequency Spectra

2010· article· en· W2150432689 on OpenAlexaff
Siamak Shakeri, Amir A. Sayegh, T.D. Todd

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicMobile Ad Hoc Networks
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceWireless mesh networkGreedy algorithmNode (physics)Mathematical optimizationRouting (electronic design automation)Optimization problemInterference (communication)Computer networkDistributed computingChannel (broadcasting)WirelessWireless networkAlgorithmEngineeringMathematicsTelecommunications

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper considers the design of secondary wireless mesh networks which use leased frequency channels. In a given geographic region, the available channels are individually priced and leased exclusively through a primary spectrum owner. The usage of each channel is also subject to published interference constraints so that the primary user is not adversely affected. When the network is designed and deployed, the secondary user would like to minimize the costs of using the required resources while satisfying its own traffic and interference requirements. This problem is formulated as a mixed integer optimization which gives the optimum deployment cost as a function of the secondary node positioning, routing, and frequency allocations. Because of the problem's complexity, the optimum result can only be found for small problem sizes. To accommodate more practical deployments, two algorithms are proposed and their performance is compared to solutions obtained from the optimization. The first algorithm is a greedy flow-based scheme (GFB) which iterates over the individual node flows based on solving a much simpler optimization at each step. The second algorithm (ILS) uses an iterated local search whose initial solution is based on constrained shortest path routing. Our results show that the proposed algorithms perform well for a variety of network scenarios.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.235
Teacher spread0.216 · 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

Citations4
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicMobile Ad Hoc NetworksFrench-language works237,207