MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Transmission time minimization of an energy harvesting cognitive radio system

2016· article· en· W2611031339 on OpenAlexaff
Peter He, Lian Zhao, Xavier Fernando

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicEnergy Harvesting in Wireless Networks
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCognitive radioComputer scienceMathematical optimizationWirelessTransmission (telecommunications)Energy (signal processing)Optimization problemEnergy harvestingConvex optimizationElectronic engineeringTelecommunicationsAlgorithmMathematicsEngineeringRegular polygon

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Telecommunication systems consume significant amount of energy from the grid. Energy harvesting wireless systems utilize energy from the environment and provide a green solution. On the other hand, cognitive radio (CR) wireless systems harvest spectrum from licensed users reducing spectrum crunch. These two techniques can be synthesized in an energy harvesting cognitive radio (EHCR) system to efficiently manage precious resources, i.e., power and spectrum. However, since the availability of both spectrum and energy is not deterministic, such a system can suffer from large delay at the transmission stage. This paper aims at providing an exact solution to the transmission time minimization problem of an EHCR system. The challenge comes from the multiple constraints. In addition to the available energy and spectrum constraints, the CR system will have to have peak power constraint to avoid interference to the licensed user. This results in a non-convex mixed-integer optimization problem for which we develop an exact solution using geometric water-filling with peak power constraints (GWFPP). We also use a recursion machinery to solve the delay minimization problem. Such a system will save energy for the power grid and satisfy user with low-latent communication. Numerical example and complexity analysis illustrate exactness and efficiency of our proposed algorithm.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.180
Teacher spread0.174 · 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
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

Citations6
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicEnergy Harvesting in Wireless NetworksFrench-language works237,207