MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2411777060 · doi:10.1109/access.2016.2579598

Cooperative Wireless Energy Harvesting and Spectrum Sharing in 5G Networks

2016· article· en· W2411777060 on OpenAlexaff
Hongyuan Gao, Waleed Ejaz, Minho Jo

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Access · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicEnergy Harvesting in Wireless Networks
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan University
FundersFundamental Research Funds for the Central UniversitiesChina Scholarship CouncilChina Postdoctoral Science FoundationNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsComputer scienceEnergy harvestingRelayWirelessEnergy (signal processing)ThroughputComputer networkWireless sensor networkData transmissionTransfer (computing)Mechanism (biology)Telecommunications

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, we propose a novel best cooperative mechanism (BCM) for wireless energy harvesting and spectrum sharing in 5G networks. Data transfer and energy harvesting are finished in the designed timeslot mode. In the proposed BCM, secondary users (SUs) harvest energy from both ambient signals and primary user's (PU's) signals. In addition, the SU's can act as relay for PUs and harvest energy from PU signals simultaneously. The proposed mechanism allows optimal time duration for data transfer within the timeslot. We formulate an optimization problem based on the proposed BCM with an objective to maximize throughput of PUs and SUs with constraints on data rate and energy harvest save ratios. The effectiveness of the proposed cooperative mechanism is verified by simulations, and it is considered as an important stepping stone for future research in this domain.

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)0.001
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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.229
Teacher spread0.214 · 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

Citations84
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE AccessSame topicEnergy Harvesting in Wireless NetworksFrench-language works237,207