MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2464085089 · doi:10.1109/twc.2016.2585115

Energy Allocation and Cooperation for Energy-Efficient Wireless Two-Tier Networks

2016· article· en· W2464085089 on OpenAlexafffund
Rindranirina Ramamonjison, Vijay K. Bhargava

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Wireless Communications · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicEnergy Harvesting in Wireless Networks
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsComputer scienceResource allocationBase stationEfficient energy useWirelessFadingWireless networkDistributed computingResource management (computing)Renewable energyComputer networkSmart gridMathematical optimizationChannel (broadcasting)TelecommunicationsElectrical engineeringMathematicsEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, we consider the resource allocation in two-tier wireless systems in which small-cell base stations harvest energy from renewable sources in addition to the conventional power grid. Moreover, we assume that each cell has access to an energy storage system with a limited battery capacity. We introduce new mechanisms that enable an efficient allocation of the available energy over time across the network. In doing so, we take into account the time-varying fading channel, the inter-cell interference and the fluctuations of harvested energy. In particular, we propose convergent offline algorithms to maximize the network energy efficiency while satisfying an average sum-rate constraint at each cell. Furthermore, we extend the resource allocation scheme by enabling an energy cooperation between the cells. By cooperating, they can exchange their harvested energy through a smart-grid power infrastructure. Using numerical simulations, we verify the convergence of the proposed algorithms and analyze the efficacy of the resource allocation and energy cooperation schemes.

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)0.003
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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.232
Teacher spread0.216 · 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

Citations37
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Wireless CommunicationsSame topicEnergy Harvesting in Wireless NetworksFrench-language works237,207