Backup Battery Analysis and Allocation against Power Outage for Cellular Base Stations
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Base stations have been widely deployed to satisfy the service coverage and explosive demand increase in today's cellular networks. Their reliability and availability heavily depend on the electrical power supply. Battery groups are installed as backup power in most of the base stations in case of power outages due to severe weathers or human-driven accidents, particularly in remote areas. The limited numbers and capacities of batteries, however, can hardly sustain a long power outage without a well-designed allocation strategy. As a result, the service interruption occurs along with an increasing maintenance cost. Meanwhile, a deep discharge of a battery in such case can also accelerate the battery degradation and eventually contribute to a higher battery replacement cost. In this paper, we closely examine the base station features and backup battery features from a 1.5-year dataset of a major cellular service provider, including 4,206 base stations distributed across 8,400 square kilometers and more than 1.5 billion records on base stations and battery statuses. Through exploiting the correlations between the battery working conditions and battery statuses, we build up a deep learning based model to estimate the remaining lifetime of backup batteries. We then develop BatAlloc, a battery allocation framework to address the mismatch between the battery supporting ability and diverse power outage incidents. We present an effective solution that minimizes both the service interruption time and the overall cost. Our real trace-driven experiments show that BatAlloc cuts down the average service interruption time from 4.7 hours to nearly zero with only 85 percent of the overall cost compared to the current practical allocation.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".