MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2963050357 · doi:10.1109/tvt.2019.2930884

A Benchmark for Joint Channel Allocation and User Scheduling in Flexible Heterogeneous Networks

2019· article· en· W2963050357 on OpenAlexaff
Shahida Jabeen, Pin‐Han Ho

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Vehicular Technology · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced MIMO Systems Optimization
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsScheduling (production processes)Computer scienceJoint (building)Benchmark (surveying)Computer networkChannel (broadcasting)Distributed computingChannel allocation schemesEngineeringTelecommunicationsWireless

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Flexible duplexing is a promising technique to improve the spectral efficiency of future cellular networks, which has been proposed mainly to provision asymmetric uplink (UL) and downlink (DL) traffic scenarios, through flexible channel allocations. However, this flexibility in the channel allocation process, which is responsible for allocating the underlying channel to different base stations in a heterogeneous network (HetNet), has brought new technical challenges due to the introduction of complex UL-to-DL and DL-to-UL interference scenarios. This paper analyzes the joint channel allocation (CA) and user scheduling (US) process for orthogonal frequency-division multiple access-based flexible HetNets, while considering exact inter-cell/intra-cell interferences. The resulting joint problem is a large-scale mixed-integer nonlinear programming problem that is computationally intractable, therefore, it has been re-formulated into a convex upper bound problem to find benchmark solutions for CA in flexible HetNets. Since, no new CA scheme has been proposed yet for the HetNets employing flexible duplexing techniques, we discuss the efficacy of existing schemes under various UL and DL traffic scenarios.

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 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 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 score0.840
Threshold uncertainty score0.742

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 studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.209
Teacher spread0.201 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations10
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Vehicular TechnologySame topicAdvanced MIMO Systems OptimizationFrench-language works237,207