MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2523975658

Joint optimal power allocation and relay selection with spatial diversity in wireless relay networks

2011· article· en· W2523975658 on OpenAlexaff
Habibul Islam, Zbigniew Dziong, K. Sohraby, Mahmoud Daneshmand, Rittwik Jana

Bibliographic record

VenueEspace ÉTS (ETS) · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicCooperative Communication and Network Coding
Canadian institutionsÉcole de Technologie Supérieure
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRelayMathematical optimizationBase stationComputer scienceRSSWirelessOptimization problemSelection (genetic algorithm)Wireless networkNode (physics)Power (physics)Computer networkMathematicsEngineeringTelecommunicationsArtificial intelligence
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract—We consider a wireless relay network (WRN) where multiple mobile stations (MSs) try to send their data to a base station (BS) either directly or via a set of fixed relay stations (RSs). For this network, we study the problem of joint optimal MS and RS power allocation and relay selection with the objective of minimizing the total transmitted power of the system. The joint optimization algorithm must satisfy the minimum data demand of each MS. We formulate the problem as a mixed integer nonlinear programming (MINLP) problem and find the solution under different relaying architectures and spatial diversity schemes. The optimal solution of the MINLP problem is exponentially complex due to its combinatorial nature. We use the MATLAB based commercial software TOMLAB to find a near optimal solution of the MINLP problem. We also find an approximate solution of the original problem by applying a simple relay selection scheme based on the channel gains between MSs and RSs. Numerical results are presented to show the performance of this simple scheme with respect to the optimal one in terms of total power consumption. I.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.631
Threshold uncertainty score0.522

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 science0.0000.001
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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.228
Teacher spread0.199 · 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

Citations1
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEspace ÉTS (ETS)Same topicCooperative Communication and Network CodingFrench-language works237,207