MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2626037362 · doi:10.1109/mcom.2017.1600293

Resource and Mobility Management in the Network Layer of 5G Cellular Ultra-Dense Networks

2017· article· en· W2626037362 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.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Communications Magazine · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced MIMO Systems Optimization
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersFP7 Information and Communication TechnologiesMinistry of Economy, Trade and IndustryEuropean Commission
KeywordsComputer scienceBandwidth (computing)Cellular networkReuseComputer networkResource management (computing)Mobility managementSpectral efficiencyInterference (communication)Radio resource managementTelecommunicationsDistributed computingWireless networkWirelessChannel (broadcasting)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The provision of very high capacity is one of the big challenges of the 5G cellular technology. This challenge will not be met using traditional approaches like increasing spectral efficiency and bandwidth, as witnessed in previous technology generations. Cell densification will play a major role thanks to its ability to increase the spatial reuse of the available resources. However, this solution is accompanied by some additional management challenges. In this article, we analyze and present the most promising solutions identified in the METIS project for the most relevant network layer challenges of cell densification: resource, interference and mobility management.

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)0.001
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 score0.915
Threshold uncertainty score0.379

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 science0.0010.000
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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.261
Teacher spread0.236 · 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