MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2217100688 · doi:10.1109/cjece.2015.2417858

Queue-Aware Channel-Adapted Scheduling and Congestion Control for Best-Effort Services in LTE Networks

2015· article· en· W2217100688 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.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Electrical and Computer Engineering · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced Wireless Network Optimization
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceQueueNetwork congestionScheduling (production processes)Maximum throughput schedulingFairness measureComputer networkRound-robin schedulingFlow control (data)Fair-share schedulingChannel (broadcasting)Real-time computingDynamic priority schedulingDistributed computingThroughputQuality of serviceMathematical optimizationNetwork packetMathematicsWirelessTelecommunications

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, we study the performance of long-term evolution (LTE) for various types of channel-adapted scheduling for nonreal-time flows, while an end-to-end congestion control algorithm controls the rate of elastic traffic at the end users. First, we propose a new type of queue-aware channel-adapted scheduling at a base station, and explain how it allocates resources to competing nonreal-time flows where channel conditions are time-varying. We also introduce a new congestion measure function for a minimum cost flow control (MCFC) algorithm in the LTE and call it an individual flow-based congestion measure. We show that using different combinations of channel-adapted scheduling at the base station and congestion control algorithms can lead to major differences in the obtained throughput and fairness for the best-effort traffic. The results clearly show that the transport protocol and scheduling algorithm can cause significant conflict in some situations. We show the advantages of the proposed queue-aware channel-adapted scheduling in performance improvement and we also show that the combination of an MCFC algorithm (in which the new individual flow-based congestion measure is applied), with queue-aware proportional fair scheduling, leads to a better tradeoff between overall throughput and fairness compared with the other studied combinations.

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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.909
Threshold uncertainty score0.556

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.179
Teacher spread0.172 · 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