MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2966955883 · doi:10.1109/tcomm.2019.2935728

Energy and Spectral Efficiency Analysis for a Device-to-Device-Enabled Millimeter-Wave OFDMA Cellular Network

2019· article· en· W2966955883 on OpenAlexafffund
Okechukwu E. Ochia, Abraham O. Fapojuwo

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Communications · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMillimeter-Wave Propagation and Modeling
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsSpectral efficiencyCellular networkStochastic geometryBase stationComputer sciencePath lossInterference (communication)Electronic engineeringEfficient energy useBandwidth (computing)Transmitter power outputCoverage probabilityTopology (electrical circuits)Computer networkEngineeringMathematicsElectrical engineeringTelecommunicationsBeamformingWirelessStatisticsTransmitter

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The spectral efficiency (SE) and energy efficiency (EE) performance of a millimeter-wave (mmWave) cellular network is studied where a user device can associate with a base station (BS) or another user for device-to-device (D2D) communication based on an interference-aware D2D distance threshold. Using the tools of stochastic geometry, the mean interference, coverage probability, area SE, and network EE are derived under the proposed association scheme. Performance of the proposed scheme is compared with that of the minimum path loss (Min PL)-based and maximum biased-received-power (Max BRP)-based association schemes. The proposed scheme is shown to give the best coverage probability performance in noise-limited networks, while the three schemes converge in performance in interference-limited networks in the high coverage threshold regime (>20 dB). Further, the proposed scheme achieves up to 60% increase in the area SE and EE, compared to the Min PL-based scheme that gives the next best performance. Lastly, the paper proposed a goal attainment algorithm that achieves up to a seven-fold decrease in the mean deviation from a preset SE objective and 50% savings in EE, compared to the achievable performance under a constant transmit power and bandwidth allocation scheme.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.241
Teacher spread0.207 · 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

Citations16
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on CommunicationsSame topicMillimeter-Wave Propagation and ModelingFrench-language works237,207