MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2782749873 · doi:10.1109/glocom.2017.8254566

Coverage and Capacity Analysis with Stretched Exponential Path Loss in Ultra-Dense Networks

2017· article· en· W2782749873 on OpenAlexaff
Mahmoud Kamel, Walaa Hamouda, Amr Youssef

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced MIMO Systems Optimization
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRayleigh fadingCoverage probabilityPath lossComputer scienceStochastic geometryBase stationSpectral efficiencyInterference (communication)Poisson point processThroughputTopology (electrical circuits)Bounded functionFadingComputer networkChannel (broadcasting)AlgorithmPoisson distributionTelecommunicationsMathematicsStatisticsWireless

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The distinct features of Ultra-Dense Networks (UDNs), namely, the close proximity of the users to the serving base stations (BSs), the high idle mode probability and the increasing probability of Line-of-Sight (LOS) links to the serving BS, impose a set of requirements on the realistic and accurate modeling of the performance of such networks. In this paper, we consider modeling the path loss by a stretched exponential model which accurately addresses the short distances (5m-350m) between the (serving/interfering) BSs and the users in UDN. Moreover, we study the impact of turning off inactive BSs, as an effective interference mitigation scheme, on the performance of the network in terms of the coverage probability, the network throughput, and the area spectral efficiency. We employ tools from stochastic geometry to model the network as a Homogeneous Poisson Point Process (HPPP). Also, Rayleigh channel fading is assumed for tractability purposes. The results show the significant impact of the users' density on the network performance where the system's interference is upper-bounded mainly by the density of the active users, thanks to turning off the inactive BSs.

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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.512
Threshold uncertainty score0.423

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.200
Teacher spread0.192 · 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
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

Citations4
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAdvanced MIMO Systems OptimizationFrench-language works237,207