MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2289792134 · doi:10.1109/glocom.2015.7417185

A QoS Monitor Selection Mechanism for Cellular Data Networks

2015· article· en· W2289792134 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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

Venue2015 IEEE Global Communications Conference (GLOBECOM) · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicWireless Communication Networks Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceQuality of serviceOverhead (engineering)Computer networkScheme (mathematics)Matching (statistics)Service (business)Transmission (telecommunications)Distributed computingReal-time computingTelecommunications

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper presents a novel distributed Quality of Service (QoS) monitoring scheme for cellular data networks serving highly dynamic users with power- limited devices. The proposed scheme relies on candidate QoS monitoring users that can efficiently submit QoS related measurements on behalf of their neighbors. These candidate users are chosen according to their devices' residual power and transmission capabilities and their estimated remaining service lifetime. Service monitoring users are then selected from these candidates using a novel user-to-user semantic similarity matching algorithm. Simulation results demonstrate the significant gains achieved by the proposed scheme in terms of the reduced traffic overhead and overall consumed users' devices power while achieving a high monitoring accuracy.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Open science
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 score0.938
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0210.006
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.228
GPT teacher head0.391
Teacher spread0.163 · 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