Optimal and suboptimal packet scheduling over correlated time varying flat fading channels
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We address the issue of optimal packet scheduling over correlated fading channels which trades off between minimization of three goals: average transmission power, average delay and average packet dropping probability. We show that the problem forms a weakly communicating Markov decision process and formulate the problem as both unconstrained and constrained problem. Relative value iteration (RVI) algorithm is used to find optimal deterministic policy for unconstrained problem, while optimal randomized policy for constrained problem is obtained using linear programming (LP) technique. Whereas with RVI only a finite number of scheduling policies can be obtained over the feasible delay region, LP can produce policies for all feasible delays with a fixed dropping probability and is computationally faster than the RVI. We show the structure of optimal deterministic policy in terms of the channel and buffer state and form a simple log functional suboptimal scheduler that approximately follows the optimal structure. Performance results are given for both constant and bursty Poisson arrivals, and the proposed suboptimal scheduler is compared with the optimal and channel threshold scheduler. Our suboptimal scheduler performs close to the optimal scheduler for every feasible delay and is robust to different channel parameters, number of actions and incoming traffic distributions.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".