MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2333287722 · doi:10.1109/glocomw.2013.6855688

Cross-layer carrier selection and power control for LTE-A uplink with Carrier Aggregation

2013· article· en· W2333287722 on OpenAlexaff
Ran Zhang, Miao Wang, Zhongming Zheng, Xuemin Shen, Liang‐Liang Xie

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced Wireless Network Optimization
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTelecommunications linkComputer sciencePower controlThroughputOffset (computer science)LTE AdvancedPhysical layerComputer networkCarrier frequency offsetBandwidth (computing)Multi-userReal-time computingPower (physics)Orthogonal frequency-division multiplexingWirelessTelecommunicationsFrequency offsetChannel (broadcasting)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Long Term Evolution-Advanced (LTE-A) standard with Carrier Aggregation (CA) is emerging as a promising technology for 4G mobile communication systems to fulfill tremendous growth of high-data-rate demand. However, in LTE-A systems with CA, the uplink Radio Resource Management (RRM) performance is greatly limited by the insufficient user transmission power and the infamous power offset effects. In this paper, we design a cross-layer carrier selection and power control strategy for LTE-A uplink with CA to improve the average user throughput, while dealing with the above limitations. Specifically, we first propose a novel estimation method to effectively predict the average bandwidth that a newly admitted user can obtain from each carrier. The time-variability of carrier load conditions is carefully taken into account. Then, an optimal carrier subset and power allocation values are determined for each arrived user to improve the average user throughput by solving a user-power-utilization maximization problem, with considering the user power constraints and offset effects. Extensive simulations validate the effectiveness of the estimation method and demonstrate that the proposed cross-layer strategy can achieve higher average user throughput compared with the existing approach.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.215
Teacher spread0.210 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations10
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAdvanced Wireless Network OptimizationFrench-language works237,207