MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2784219033 · doi:10.1109/glocom.2017.8254068

Game Theoretic Analysis of Post Handoff Target Channel Sharing in Cognitive Radio Networks

2017· article· en· W2784219033 on OpenAlexaff
Nitin Gupta, Sanjay Kumar Dhurandher, Isaac Woungang, Joel J. P. C. Rodrigues

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicCognitive Radio Networks and Spectrum Sensing
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan University
FundersFundo para o Desenvolvimento Tecnológico das TelecomunicaçõesFinanciadora de Estudos e ProjetosInstituto Nacional de Telecomunicações
KeywordsCognitive radioChannel (broadcasting)Computer scienceComputer networkHandoverThroughputNash equilibriumQueueGame theoryStrategyNon-cooperative gameBargaining problemChannel allocation schemesTelecommunicationsMathematical optimizationWirelessMicroeconomicsMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Handoff in cognitive radio networks (CRNs) is a situation that arises whenever a secondary user (SU) has to switch from its current channel to a new target channel in case the primary user (PU) reclaims the current channel. Often when a SU switches to a target channel, it finds that it has to share the target channel with the coexistent users. These coexistent users can either be the interrupted or non-interrupted SUs who also wish to share the same channel. Long waiting in a queue or simultaneous access to the channel may decrease the SU's and network's throughput considerably. The SUs may even behave selfishly to maximize their own throughput. This paper analyzes the interactions and behavior of the SUs during the target channel sharing through non-cooperative, mixed strategic, and cooperative games. The benefits of the SUs and the overall network is analyzed by finding the Nash equilibrium and the Nash bargaining solution (NBS) for the non-cooperative, mixed strategy, and cooperative game respectively.

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 score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.024

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.257
Teacher spread0.241 · 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

Citations7
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicCognitive Radio Networks and Spectrum SensingFrench-language works237,207