MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2486917759 · doi:10.4018/ijcini.2016040102

Multiobjective Multivariate Optimization of Joint Spectrum Sensing and Power Control in Cognitive Wireless Networks

2016· article· en· W2486917759 on OpenAlexaff
Hieu V. Dang, Witold Kinsner

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Cognitive Informatics and Natural Intelligence · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicCognitive Radio Networks and Spectrum Sensing
Canadian institutionsResearch ManitobaUniversity of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceCognitive radioPower controlMaximizationOptimization problemMathematical optimizationThroughputMulti-objective optimizationJoint (building)WirelessWireless networkInterference (communication)Power (physics)Computer networkAlgorithmTelecommunicationsMachine learningChannel (broadcasting)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, the authors investigate trade-off factors in designing efficient spectrum sensing and optimal power control techniques for a multichannel, multiple-user cognitive wireless network. They introduce the problem of joint spectrum sensing and power control as a maximization of the network throughput and a minimization of the interference to the network. These two optimization objectives can be achieved by a joint determination of sensing and transmission parameters of the secondary users, such as sensing times, decision threshold vectors, and power allocation vectors. There is a conflict between these two objectives, thus a multiobjective optimization problem is introduced. The authors propose an analytical approach based on Newton's methods and nonlinear barrier method to solve this large-scale joint multiobjective optimization problem.

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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.259
Teacher spread0.248 · 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
GenreMethods

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

Citations2
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Cognitive Informatics and Natural IntelligenceSame topicCognitive Radio Networks and Spectrum SensingFrench-language works237,207