Interference Management in Full-Duplex Wireless Cellular Networks via Fractional Programming - Invited Paper
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Mutual interference is a key obstacle in the realistic adoption of full-duplex (FD) technique in future wireless cellular networks. Interference is a much more pressing problem for FD system than for the conventional half-duplex (HD) system, because FD allows the same time-frequency resource to be used for both uplink and downlink, thus possibly creating myriad interference between multiple transmissions throughout the network. Without proper interference control, FD may not even outperform HD in a multicell setup. The main objective of this paper is to show that coordinated scheduling and power control enables wireless cellular networks to reap significant system-level performance improvement due to FD. Toward this end, this paper utilizes fractional programming to derive a sequence of convex reformulations that allow distributed and efficient iterative optimization. Numerical results suggest that the proposed system-level interference management can provide 30-40% rate gain for an optimized FD multicell network as compared to optimized HD.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 it