Low-Complexity SINR Feasibility Checking and Joint Power and Admission Control in Prioritized Multitier Cellular Networks
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Next generation cellular networks will consist of multiple tiers of cells and users associated with different network tiers may have different priorities (e.g., macrocell-picocell- femtocell networks with macro tier prioritized over pico tier, which is again prioritized over femto tier). Designing efficient joint power and admission control (JPAC) algorithms for such networks under a cochannel deployment (i.e., underlay) scenario is of significant importance. Feasibility checking of a given target signal-to-noise-plus-interference ratio (SINR) vector is generally the most significant contributor to the complexity of JPAC algorithms in single/multitier underlay cellular networks. This is generally accomplished through iterative strategies whose complexity is either unpredictable or of O(M3), when the well-known relationship between the SINR vector and the power vector is used, where M is the number of users/links. In this paper, we derive a novel relationship between a given SINR vector and its corresponding uplink/downlink power vector based on which the feasibility checking can be performed with a complexity of O(B3+ MB), where B is the number of base stations. This is significantly less compared to O(M3) in many cellular wireless networks since the number of base stations is generally much lower than the number of users/links in such networks. The developed novel relationship between the SINR and power vector not only substantially reduces the complexity of designing JPAC algorithms, but also provides insights into developing efficient but low-complexity power update strategies for prioritized multitier cellular networks. We propose two such algorithms and through simulations, we show that our proposed algorithms outperform the existing ones in prioritized cellular 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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.012 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".