MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2162371509 · doi:10.1109/glocom.2009.5425304

Pilot Power Protocol for Autonomous Infrastructure Based Multihop Cellular Networks

2009· article· en· W2162371509 on OpenAlexaff
Mark DeFaria, E.S. Sousa

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicCooperative Communication and Network Coding
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBase stationComputer networkBottleneckCellular networkComputer scienceTransmission (telecommunications)Protocol (science)Transmitter power outputPower (physics)TelecommunicationsEmbedded systemChannel (broadcasting)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In a multihop cellular network, mobile terminals are able to transmit directly to other mobile terminals allowing them to lower their maximum transmission power and use other terminals as relays to forward traffic towards the base station. However, a large amount of interference is created near the base station because all traffic either emanates or is destined to the base station making it the capacity bottleneck of the network. In an autonomous infrastructure multihop cellular network, certain mobile terminals that have a connection to the backbone network act as access points and send traffic directly onto the backbone network, as would a base station. This reduces the amount of traffic required to be handled by the base station and increases network capacity. However, access points will require transmission parameters like their pilot power to be adjusted autonomously to optimal levels. In this paper, we propose an autonomous pilot power protocol that can be used by both access points and base stations. Our simulation results show that by adjusting a parameter within the pilot power protocol, a required percentage of covered terminals can be achieved by the network without prior knowledge of the location or density of terminals. Furthermore, the pilot power protocol determines the pilot power level which is optimal in terms of SINR and power consumption that achieves the required coverage while effectively eliminating the capacity bottleneck that existed at the base station.

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)0.004
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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.301
Teacher spread0.268 · 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
GenreMethods

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

Citations2
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicCooperative Communication and Network Coding→French-language works237,207→