MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2396020700 · doi:10.1109/tvt.2015.2440412

Joint Beamforming, Power, and Channel Allocation in Multiuser and Multichannel Underlay MISO Cognitive Radio Networks

2015· article· en· W2396020700 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Vehicular Technology · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced MIMO Systems Optimization
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsBeamformingCognitive radioUnderlayMathematical optimizationComputer scienceOptimization problemChannel (broadcasting)Channel allocation schemesRelaxation (psychology)AlgorithmSignal-to-noise ratio (imaging)MathematicsTelecommunicationsWireless

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, we consider joint beamforming, power, and channel allocation in a multiuser and multichannel underlay multiple-input-single-output (MISO) cognitive radio network (CRN). In this system, the primary users' spectrum can be reused by secondary-user transmitters (SU-TXs) to maximize spectrum utilization, whereas intrauser interference is minimized by implementing beamforming at each SU-TX. After formulating the joint optimization problem as a nonconvex mixed-integer nonlinear programming problem, we propose a solution that consists of two stages. In the first stage, a feasible solution for power allocation and beamforming vectors is derived under a given channel allocation by converting the original problem into a convex form with an introduced optimal auxiliary variable and a semidefinite relaxation approach. In the second stage, two explicit searching algorithms, i.e., genetic algorithm (GA) and simulated annealing (SA)-based algorithm, are proposed to determine suboptimal channel allocations. Simulation results show that the beamforming and power and channel allocation with SA algorithm can achieve a close-to-optimal sum rate while having lower computational complexity compared with the beamforming and power and channel allocation with the GA algorithm. Furthermore, our proposed allocation scheme has significant improvement in achievable sum rate compared with the existing zero-forcing beamforming.

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 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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.865
Threshold uncertainty score0.953

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.222
Teacher spread0.208 · 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