MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2504115418 · doi:10.1109/icc.2016.7511507

Multi-operator spectrum sharing using matching game in small cells network

2016· article· en· W2504115418 on OpenAlexaff
Tachporn Sanguanpuak, Sudarshan Guruacharya, Nandana Rajatheva, Mehdi Bennis, Dusit Niyato, Matti Latva‐aho

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced MIMO Systems Optimization
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPairwise comparisonMatching (statistics)Computer scienceOperator (biology)Mathematical optimizationPoisson point processConvergence (economics)Base stationPotential gamePoisson distributionMathematicsComputer networkNash equilibriumArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, we study a problem where multiple operators (OPs) need to share a common pool of spectrum with each other. Our objective is to maximize the social welfare, defined as the overall weighted sum rate of the OPs. The problem is decomposed into two parts: the first part is to allocate RBs to OPs, which we do so by extending the framework of many-to-one matching game with externalities. The second part is to allocate power of small cell base stations (SBSs) belonging to each OP, which is accomplished using reinforcement learning. Assuming that the SBSs associated with each OPs are spatially distributed according to Poisson point process (PPP), we show that pairwise stable matchings achieve local maximas of the social welfare function. We propose two algorithms to search for the stable matchings. Simulation results show that these algorithms are well behaved in terms of convergence and efficiency of the solutions.

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 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 score0.665
Threshold uncertainty score0.503

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.221
Teacher spread0.202 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations7
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAdvanced MIMO Systems OptimizationFrench-language works237,207