MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2162156798 · doi:10.1109/iwqos.2009.5201384

Cooperative multicast scheduling with random network coding in WiMAX

2009· article· en· W2162156798 on OpenAlex
Jin Jin, Baochun Li

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
FieldComputer Science
TopicCooperative Communication and Network Coding
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMulticastComputer networkComputer scienceXcastSource-specific multicastPragmatic General MulticastProtocol Independent MulticastIP multicastDistributed computingWiMAXDistance Vector Multicast Routing ProtocolLinear network codingWirelessNetwork packetTelecommunications

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Multicast and Broadcast Service (MBS) in WiMAX has emerged as the next-generation wireless infrastructure to broadcast data or digital video. Multicast scheduling protocols play a critical role in achieving efficient multicast transmissions in MBS. However, the current state-of-the-art protocols, based on the shared-channel single-hop transmission model, do not exploit any potential advantages provided by the channel and cooperative diversity in multicast sessions, even while WiMAX OFDMA provides such convenience. The inefficient multicast transmission leads to the under-utilization of scarce wireless bandwidth. In this paper, we revisit the multicast scheduling problem, but with a new perspective in the specific case of MBS in WiMAX, considering the use of multiple ODFMA channels, multiple hops, and multiple paths simultaneously. Participating users in the multicast session are dynamically enabled as relays and concurrently communicate with others to supply more data. During the transmission, random network coding is adopted, which helps to significantly reduce the overhead. We design practical scheduling protocols by jointly studying the problems of channel and power allocation on relays, which are very critical for efficient cooperative communication. Protocols that are theoretically and practically feasible are provided to optimize multicast rates and to efficiently allocate resources in the network. Finally, with simulation studies, we evaluate our proposed protocols to highlight the effectiveness of cooperative communication and random network coding in multicast scheduling with respect to improving performance.

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)0.000
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.851
Threshold uncertainty score0.460

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.276
Teacher spread0.248 · 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