MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2168193419 · doi:10.1109/ciss.2007.4298315

A New Decentralized Power Allocation Strategy in Single-Hop Wireless Networks

2007· article· en· W2168193419 on OpenAlexaff
Jamshid Abouei, Masoud Ebrahimi, Amir K. Khandani

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicCooperative Communication and Network Coding
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceHop (telecommunications)Rayleigh fadingPower controlWirelessWireless networkChannel (broadcasting)Power (physics)Computer networkFadingTelecommunications

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, a simple decentralized power allocation strategy is proposed, which relies on the local information in a single-hop wireless network with n links. The main goal of the strategy is to improve the average sum-rate. We first define a new utility-based framework, in which each user takes into account the negative impact of its power increment on the other users performance. For large n and by knowing only the direct channel gain h <sub xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">ii</sub> , the optimum strategy for user i is to transmit with full power or remain silent. The transmission policy is to compare h <sub xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">ii</sub> with a prespecified threshold tau <sub xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">n</sub> that is a function of n. Under a Rayleigh fading channel condition, it is demonstrated that among n pairs of nodes, the average number of active links is of order log n. Also, the average sum-rate scales as Theta(log n). The performance of the proposed strategy is compared with that of the centralized power allocation scheme and the non-cooperative power control games through simulation and the analytical arguments. The proposed on-off power allocation scheme has the advantage of not requiring a central controller. The proposed strategy relies on a one shot game with a simple structure, rather than the iterative mechanism used in the pricing algorithm. These properties make our scheme more practical in time-varying networks.

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 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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.965
Threshold uncertainty score0.443

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.038
GPT teacher head0.287
Teacher spread0.249 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations15
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicCooperative Communication and Network CodingFrench-language works237,207