MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2160105108 · doi:10.1109/icc.2005.1494342

Performance evaluation framework for vertical handoff algorithms in heterogeneous networks

2005· article· en· W2160105108 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicIPv6, Mobility, Handover, Networks, Security
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceHandoverQuality of serviceComputer networkHeterogeneous networkWireless networkUnderlayVertical handoverWirelessNext-generation networkCellular networkBandwidth (computing)Distributed computingTelecommunicationsThe Internet

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The next generation (4G) wireless network is envisioned as a convergence of different wireless access technologies providing the user with the best anywhere anytime connection and improving the system resource utilization. The integration of wireless local area network (WLAN) hotspots and the third generation (3G) cellular network has recently received much attention. While the 3G-network can provide global coverage with a low data-rate service, the WLAN can provide a high data-rate service within the hotspots. Although increasing the underlay network utilization is expected to increase the user available bandwidth, it may violate the quality-of-service (QoS) requirements of active real-time applications. Hence, achieving seamless handoff between different wireless technologies, known as vertical handoff (VHO), is a major challenge for 4G-system implementation. Several factors, such as application QoS requirements and handoff delay, should be considered to realize an application transparent handoff. We present a novel framework to evaluate the impact of VHO algorithm design on system resource utilization and user perceived QoS. We used this framework to compare the performance of two different VHO algorithms. The results show a very good match between simulation and analytical results. In addition, it clarifies the tradeoff between achieving high resource utilization and satisfying user QoS expectations.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.336
Threshold uncertainty score0.915

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.264
Teacher spread0.247 · 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