MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2968257815 · doi:10.1109/access.2019.2934751

PCS Threshold Selection for Spatial Reuse in High Density CSMA/CA MIMO Wireless Networks

2019· article· en· W2968257815 on OpenAlexafffund
Phillip B. Oni, Steven D. Blostein

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Access · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced MIMO Systems Optimization
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsComputer scienceComputer networkThroughputMIMOCarrier sense multiple access with collision avoidanceNode (physics)Wireless networkChannel (broadcasting)WirelessEngineeringTelecommunications

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Multiple-input multiple-out (MIMO) equipment improves the spectral efficiency of wireless local area network (WLAN) systems. However, in a large-scale or dense MIMO WLANs, overlapping radio cells or basic service sets (BSSs) are inherent. This prevents multiple concurrent transmissions and degrades spatial reuse. The inability to separate multiple simultaneous transmissions in space is detrimental to overall system performance. The carrier sense multiple access collision avoidance (CSMA/CA) protocol uses the physical carrier sensing (PCS) threshold to determine channel state at the physical layer (PHY) and decide on the number of concurrent transmissions allowed per time slot. Since the PCS threshold determines the spatial reuse under the CSMA/CA protocol, which consequently determines the interference level and the network aggregate throughput, we address PCS threshold selection for dense uplink (UL) MIMO WLAN systems. A closed-form expression is derived for selecting the PCS threshold based on the fundamental parameters of the network where nodes are randomly placed according to a Poisson point process (PPP). We obtain the PCS threshold value that maximizes the spatial density of throughput (SDT) and study the effectiveness of the proposed framework under moderate to high node density. In addition, we analyze the effect of WLAN density on interference from concurrent transmitters. The key observation is that PCS threshold selection should take into account key network characteristics including node density, target SINR or threshold, path-loss exponent and antenna configuration.

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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.476
Threshold uncertainty score0.772

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 communication0.0000.001
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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.244
Teacher spread0.232 · 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

Citations7
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE AccessSame topicAdvanced MIMO Systems OptimizationFrench-language works237,207