MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2787345238 · doi:10.1109/pimrc.2017.8292412

A hybrid network selection scheme for heterogeneous wireless access network

2017· article· en· W2787345238 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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicIPv6, Mobility, Handover, Networks, Security
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceWeightingRanking (information retrieval)Computer networkNode (physics)Wireless networkAccess networkWirelessHeterogeneous networkScheme (mathematics)Distributed computingMachine learningEngineeringTelecommunicationsMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Heterogeneous wireless access network (HWAN), an integration of different radio access technologies (RATs) in an overlapping zone, supports bandwidth hungry application and fulfills the demands for high data rates. In this paper, we explored a novel hybrid scheme for RAT selection in HWAN, a two step process, where both a central controller node (CCN) and user device (UD) are involved in the process of network selection. During the first step UD screens the available list of scanned networks based on received signal strength and user mobility profile. The results for the first step of RAT screening using multiplicative exponential weighting method (MEW) are compared with multi criteria simple additive weighting (SAW) utility function. In our second step the CCN takes multi criteria related to application, terminal and network, and generates a sorted list of the most appropriate RATs based on evaluating MEW utility function. The CCN, then associates users to one (single connection) or more available RATs (multi-homed). Using Matlab based simulations, the process of RATs ranking and association is elaborated by calculating final utilities of different networks. The impact of different crucial criteria on RATs ranking results have been explored. Furthermore, we compared our proposed hybrid approach with the traditional mechanisms. The simulation results show that the decision of our proposed hybrid mechanism is more precise than the existing traditional approaches.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.355
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

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 studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.266
Teacher spread0.246 · 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