MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2156681981 · doi:10.1109/tvt.2009.2021180

System Design and Throughput Analysis for Multihop Relaying in Cellular Systems

2009· article· en· W2156681981 on OpenAlexaff
Kevin R. Jacobson, Witold A. Krzymień

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Vehicular Technology · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicCooperative Communication and Network Coding
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsThroughputComputer networkRelayComputer scienceOverhead (engineering)Cellular networkPhysical layerReusePath lossSpectral efficiencyWirelessDistributed computingEngineeringChannel (broadcasting)Telecommunications

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Wireless multihop relaying can provide a great improvement in systemwide throughput and coverage in a cellular system. However, since additional resources (time or frequency slots) and overhead are required to perform relaying, the addition of relays into a cellular system must be carefully designed for the system's specific geometry, topology, and propagation environment. Maximizing the benefit of multihop relaying requires that the medium access control (MAC) layer scheduler be aware of physical (PHY) layer conditions. Multihop relaying increases networkwide throughput by enabling spatial reuse within a cell and by significantly reducing the path loss on each hop. The most significant gain results from adding enough relays to create line-of-sight (LOS) paths on all relay hops. To assist with system design, we present a methodology of analyzing network throughput and area-averaged spectral efficiency for multihop relay-enhanced cellular systems, including cross-layer considerations. In addition, we describe a technique that may be used to determine spatial reuse schedules. In this paper, we use a realistic model and typical cellular scenarios to show how relaying can be used to improve coverage and throughput in a real-world system.

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 score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.018

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.262
Teacher spread0.229 · 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

Citations19
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Vehicular TechnologySame topicCooperative Communication and Network CodingFrench-language works237,207