ECO-FiWi: An Energy Conservation Scheme for Integrated Fiber-Wireless Access Networks
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Integrated fiber-wireless (FiWi) access networks aim at taking full advantage of the reliability and high capacity of the optical backhaul along with the flexibility, ubiquity, and cost savings of the wireless/cellular front-end to provide broadband services for both mobile and fixed users. In FiWi access networks, energy efficiency issues must be addressed in a comprehensive fashion that takes into account not only wireless front-end but also optical backhaul segments to extend the battery life of wireless devices and allow operators to reduce their OPEX, while not compromising quality of service (QoS). This paper proposes an energy conservation scheme for FiWi networks (ECO-FiWi) that jointly schedules power-saving modes of wireless stations and access points and optical network units to reduce their energy consumption. ECO-FiWi maximizes the overall network performance by leveraging TDMA to synchronize the power-saving modes and incorporate them into the dynamic bandwidth allocation (DBA) process. A comprehensive energy saving model and an M/G/1 queuing-based analysis of downstream and upstream end-to-end frame delays are presented accounting for both backhaul and front-end network segments. Analytical results show that ECO-FiWi achieves significant amounts of energy saving, while preserving upstream delay and incurring a low delay for downstream traffic.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it