MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2551866416 · doi:10.1109/twc.2016.2626444

Optimal Dynamic Point Selection for Power Minimization in Multiuser Downlink CoMP

2016· article· en· W2551866416 on OpenAlexafffund
Duy H. N. Nguyen, Long Bao Le, Tho Le‐Ngoc

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Wireless Communications · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced MIMO Systems Optimization
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityInstitut National de la Recherche ScientifiqueUniversité du Québec à Montréal
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaFonds Québécois de la Recherche sur la Nature et les Technologies
KeywordsTelecommunications linkSelection (genetic algorithm)Computer scienceMinificationMathematical optimizationMultiuser detectionTelecommunicationsMathematicsCode division multiple accessArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper examines a coordinated multi-point transmission/reception system where multiple base-stations (BSs) employ coordinated beamforming to serve multiple mobile-stations (MSs). Under the dynamic point selection mode, each MS can be assigned to only one BS at any time. This paper then presents a solution framework to optimize the BS associations and coordinated beamformers for all MSs. With target signal-to-interference-plus-noise ratios at the MSs, the design objective is to minimize either the weighted sum transmit power or the per-BS transmit power margin. Since the original optimization problems contain binary variables indicating the BS associations, finding their optimal solutions is a challenging task. To circumvent this difficulty, we first relax the original problems into new optimization problems by expanding their constraint sets. Based on the nonconvex quadratic constrained quadratic programming framework, we show that these relaxed problems can be solved optimally. Interestingly, with the first design objective, the obtained solution from the relaxed problem is also optimal to the original problem. With the second design objective, a suboptimal solution to the original problem is then proposed, based on the obtained solution from the relaxed problem. Simulation results show that the resulting jointly optimal BS association and beamforming design significantly outperforms fixed BS association 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 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: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.922
Threshold uncertainty score0.872

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.256
Teacher spread0.243 · 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
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

Citations16
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Wireless CommunicationsSame topicAdvanced MIMO Systems OptimizationFrench-language works237,207