MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2339860134 · doi:10.1109/tvt.2015.2425934

Energy Efficiency–Spectral Efficiency Tradeoff: A Multiobjective Optimization Approach

2015· article· en· W2339860134 on OpenAlexaff
Osama Amin, Ebrahim Bedeer, Mohamed H. Ahmed, Octavia A. Dobre

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Vehicular Technology · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced MIMO Systems Optimization
Canadian institutionsMemorial University of NewfoundlandUniversity of British Columbia, Okanagan CampusUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMathematical optimizationOrthogonal frequency-division multiplexingChannel (broadcasting)Resource allocationMulti-objective optimizationEfficient energy useComputer scienceOptimization problemSpectral efficiencySignal-to-noise ratio (imaging)Function (biology)MathematicsEngineeringTelecommunications

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, we consider the resource-allocation problem for energy efficiency (EE)-spectral efficiency (SE) tradeoff. Unlike traditional research that uses the EE as an objective function and imposes constraints either on the SE or on the achievable rate, we propound a multiobjective optimization approach that can flexibly switch between the EE and SE functions or change the priority level of each function using a tradeoff parameter. Our dynamic approach is more tractable than the conventional approaches and more convenient to realistic communication applications and scenarios. We prove that the multiobjective optimization of the EE and SE is equivalent to a simple problem that maximizes the achievable rate/SE and minimizes the total power consumption. Then, we apply the generalized framework of the resource allocation for the EE-SE tradeoff to optimally allocate the subcarriers' power for orthogonal frequency-division multiplexing (OFDM) with imperfect channel estimation. Finally, we use numerical results to discuss the choice of the tradeoff parameter and study the effect of the estimation error, transmission power budget, and channel-to-noise ratio on the multiobjective optimization.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
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 score0.021

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.207
Teacher spread0.197 · 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

Citations99
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Vehicular TechnologySame topicAdvanced MIMO Systems OptimizationFrench-language works237,207