Throughput Maximization in Cloud Radio Access Networks Using Network Coding
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper is interested in maximizing the total throughput of cloud radio access networks (CRANs) in which multiple radio remote heads (RRHs) are connected to a central computing unit known as the cloud. The transmit frame of each RRH consists of multiple radio resources blocks (RRBs), and the cloud is responsible for synchronizing these RRBS and scheduling them to users. Unlike previous works that consider allocating each RRB to only a single user at each time instance, this paper proposes to mix the flows of multiple users in each RRB using instantly decodable network coding (IDNC). The proposed scheme is thus designed to jointly schedule the users to different RRBs, choose the encoded file sent in each of them, and the rate at which each of them is transmitted. Hence, the paper maximizes the throughput which is defined as the number of correctly received bits. To jointly fulfill this objective, we design a graph in which each vertex represents a possible user-RRB association, encoded file, and transmission rate. By appropriately choosing the weights of vertices, the scheduling problem is shown to be equivalent to a maximum weight clique problem over the newly introduced graph. Simulation results show the performance of the proposed scheme and reveal that it largely outperforms coding free solutions.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".