MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2346740746 · doi:10.1109/access.2016.2562498

Coalitional Games for Joint Co-Tier and Cross-Tier Cooperative Spectrum Sharing in Dense Heterogeneous Networks

2016· article· en· W2346740746 on OpenAlexafffund
Mouna Hajir, Rami Langar, François Gagnon

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Access · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced MIMO Systems Optimization
Canadian institutionsÉcole de Technologie Supérieure
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsMacrocellComputer scienceComputer networkTelecommunications linkBase stationHeterogeneous networkCellular networkDistributed computingWireless networkWirelessTelecommunications

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

With the dense deployment of small cells in the next generation of mobile networks, the users from different tiers suffer from high downlink interferences. In this paper, we propose a game theoretic approach for joint co-tier and cross-tier collaboration in heterogeneous networks and analyze the relevance of the proposed scheme. First, we propose a coalition structure game with a weighted Owen value as imputation, where the small-cell base stations (SBSs) and their connecting macrocell user equipments (MUEs) form a priori union. We prove that the proposed framework optimizes the users profit. As an additional global benefit, the SBSs are encouraged to host the harmed public users in their vicinity. Second, we propose a canonical game with a weighted solidarity value as imputation to allow cooperation among SBSs and MUEs when they fail to connect to nearby SBSs. We prove that the weak players are protected in this scheme and that a high degree of fairness is provided in the game. We compare through extensive simulations the proposed frameworks with state-of-the-art resource allocation solutions, access modes, and legacy game-theoretic approaches. We show that the proposed framework obtains the best performances for the MUEs and small-cells user equipments in terms of throughput and fairness. Throughput gain is in order of 40% even reaching 50% for both types of users.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
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 score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.301
Teacher spread0.274 · 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

Citations23
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE AccessSame topicAdvanced MIMO Systems OptimizationFrench-language works237,207