MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2318997196 · doi:10.1049/iet-com.2015.1213

Cross‐layer aware joint design of sensing and frame durations in cognitive radio networks

2016· article· en· W2318997196 on OpenAlexaff
Shaojie Zhang, Abdelhakim Hafid, Haitao Zhao, Shan Wang

Bibliographic record

VenueIET Communications · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicCognitive Radio Networks and Spectrum Sensing
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
FundersNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsCognitive radioJoint (building)Computer scienceFrame (networking)Layer (electronics)CognitionComputer networkTelecommunicationsSpeech recognitionWirelessPsychologyNeuroscienceEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The tradeoff between increasing secondary users’ (SUs’) throughput and decreasing interferences to primary user (PU) is an important problem in cognitive radio networks. Joint design of sensing duration and frame duration has a crucial impact on both these two conflicting attributes but has not been studied yet. In this study, using a cross‐layer approach, the authors investigate joint design of sensing duration and frame duration for the tradeoff. Specially, they consider that PU's traffic randomly changes within a secondary frame and multiple SUs contend to use the licensed channel based on widely used large/small‐scale‐backoff‐based MAC protocols. By modelling more realistic PU's traffic, imperfect spectrum sensing in PHY and multiple SUs’ access contention in MAC, the authors reformulate the sensing‐throughput tradeoff problem to maximise SUs’ throughput while restricting interference probability to PU under a tolerable level. Moreover, the optimal solution is analysed and a bi‐dimensional search algorithm is presented. Simulation results show that the authors’ proposal achieves better throughput performance than conventional approaches. They also show how the optimal solution varies with received PU's signal‐to‐noise ratio and PU's traffic distribution.

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)0.000
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.945
Threshold uncertainty score0.432

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 head0.065
GPT teacher head0.303
Teacher spread0.239 · 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
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

Citations8
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIET CommunicationsSame topicCognitive Radio Networks and Spectrum SensingFrench-language works237,207