MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2757060298 · doi:10.1002/dac.3411

Distributed simultaneous wireless information and power transfer in multiuser amplify‐and‐forward ad hoc wireless networks

2017· article· en· W2757060298 on OpenAlexaff
Mohammed W. Baidas, Masoud M. Afghah, Fatemeh Afghah

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Communication Systems · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicEnergy Harvesting in Wireless Networks
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceRelayNode (physics)Computer networkWireless ad hoc networkWirelessWireless networkMatching (statistics)Wireless power transferPower (physics)TelecommunicationsMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Summary This paper studies the problem of stable node matching for distributed simultaneous wireless information and power transfer in multiuser amplify‐and‐forward ad hoc wireless networks. Particularly, each source node aims to be paired with another node that takes the role of an amplify‐and‐forward relay to forward its signal to the destination, such that the achievable rate is improved, in return of some payment made to the relaying node. Each relaying node splits its received signal from its respective source into two parts: one for information processing and the other for energy harvesting. In turn, a matching‐theoretic solution based on the one‐to‐one stable marriage matching game is studied, and a distributed polynomial‐time complexity algorithm is proposed to pair each source node with its best potential relaying node based on the power‐splitting ratios, such that their utilities or payments are maximized while achieving network stability. For comparison purposes, an algorithm to enumerate all possible stable matchings is also devised to study the impact of different matchings on the source and relay utilities. Simulation results are presented to validate the proposed matching algorithm and illustrate that it yields sum‐utility and sum‐payment that are closely comparable to those of centralized power allocation and node pairing, with the added merits of low complexity, truth telling, and network stability.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.238
Teacher spread0.229 · 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

Citations5
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Communication SystemsSame topicEnergy Harvesting in Wireless NetworksFrench-language works237,207