MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2549475464 · doi:10.1016/j.dcan.2016.11.003

Optimal resource allocation solutions for heterogeneous cognitive radio networks

2016· article· en· W2549475464 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueDigital Communications and Networks · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicCognitive Radio Networks and Spectrum Sensing
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceCognitive radioRelevance (law)ScarcityResource allocationExploitHeterogeneous networkResource (disambiguation)Wireless networkWirelessRisk analysis (engineering)Management scienceTelecommunicationsComputer networkComputer security

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cognitive radio networks (CRN) are currently gaining immense recognition as the most-likely next-generation wireless communication paradigm, because of their enticing promise of mitigating the spectrum scarcity and/or underutilisation challenge. Indisputably, for this promise to ever materialise, CRN must of necessity devise appropriate mechanisms to judiciously allocate their rather scarce or limited resources (spectrum and others) among their numerous users. ‘Resource allocation (RA) in CRN', which essentially describes mechanisms that can effectively and optimally carry out such allocation, so as to achieve the utmost for the network, has therefore recently become an important research focus. However, in most research works on RA in CRN, a highly significant factor that describes a more realistic and practical consideration of CRN has been ignored (or only partially explored), i.e., the aspect of the heterogeneity of CRN. To address this important aspect, in this paper, RA models that incorporate the most essential concepts of heterogeneity, as applicable to CRN, are developed and the imports of such inclusion in the overall networking are investigated. Furthermore, to fully explore the relevance and implications of the various heterogeneous classifications to the RA formulations, weights are attached to the different classes and their effects on the network performance are studied. In solving the developed complex RA problems for heterogeneous CRN, a solution approach that examines and exploits the structure of the problem in achieving a less-complex reformulation, is extensively employed. This approach, as the results presented show, makes it possible to obtain optimal solutions to the rather difficult RA problems of heterogeneous CRN.

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.

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 score0.991
Threshold uncertainty score0.678

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 studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.248
Teacher spread0.222 · 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