MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2159149320 · doi:10.1109/glocom.2007.956

On Optimal Admission Control for Multi-Service Cellular/WLAN Interworking

2007· article· en· W2159149320 on OpenAlexaff
Enrique Stevens‐Navarro, A. Hamed Mohsenian Rad, Vincent W. S. Wong

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicWireless Networks and Protocols
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceQuality of serviceComputer networkAdmission controlCall Admission ControlCellular networkChannel (broadcasting)Service (business)Wireless networkWirelessTelecommunications

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The complementary characteristics of cellular systems and wireless local area networks (WLANs) make them attractive candidates to jointly offer a seamless wireless solution. In an integrated cellular/WLAN system, the quality of service (QoS) requirements for different services (e.g., voice and real-time video) require adequate admission control policies to limit the number of connections in each network. In this paper, we analytically develop a comprehensive model to facilitate the optimal evaluation of different admission control policies in a multi-service integrated cellular/WLAN system. Given the model, we formulate two optimization problems to adjust admission control parameters. The first problem is to maximize the network revenue while the second problem is to minimize the required network resources subject to QoS constraints. We evaluate each problem when different combinations of cutoff priority and fractional guard channel admission control policies are being used. We show that a combination of two cutoff priority policies achieves the best solution for both problems.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
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 score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.029

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
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 head0.044
GPT teacher head0.313
Teacher spread0.269 · 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

Citations13
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicWireless Networks and ProtocolsFrench-language works237,207