MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2982524715 · doi:10.1109/wcnc.2019.8885482

Decoupled Uplink-Downlink User Association in Ultra-Dense Networks: A Contract-Theoretic Approach

2019· article· en· W2982524715 on OpenAlexaff
Chen Dai, Kun Zhu, Ran Wang, Yuanyuan Xu

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced MIMO Systems Optimization
Canadian institutionsNovelis (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTelecommunications linkComputer scienceBase stationComputer networkUser equipmentAssociation (psychology)WirelessChannel (broadcasting)Transmitter power outputTelecommunications

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

User association is a crucial factor that affects the performance of wireless networks. In current cellular networks, user association is typically coupled, which means an user equipment (UE) must associate with the same base station (BS) in uplink (UL) and downlink (DL). For single-tier wireless networks, such mechanism is simple and effective. However, in heterogeneous ultra-dense networks (UDNs), there are distinct differences in transmission power, data traffic and channel quality etc., for which coupled association could restrict the performance of system. To cope with it, the concept of decoupled UL-DL (DUDe) association has been introduced recently, which enables a UE to associate with different BSs in UL and DL. In this paper, we investigate decoupled UL-DL user association in UDNs. Considering the existence of asymmetric information (i.e., channel gains and intercell interferences), which can be seen as the private information for UE, we propose a contract-theoretic user association approach. Particularly, we model the decoupled association process as a monopoly labor market, where BSs act as employers and offer contracts to employees (i.e., UEs). The contract items cover the available associated bandwidths, transmitted powers and corresponding prices. Then BS broadcasts these drafted contract information, and UE selects to sign the optimal contract by considering her own demands. Numerical results show significant superiorities of DUDe than coupled UL-DL association in perspective of nodes utilities and social surplus, and compared with the existing user association methods, contract-theoretic approach shows a certain improvement in performance.

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 score0.897
Threshold uncertainty score0.741

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 head0.004
GPT teacher head0.192
Teacher spread0.189 · 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

Citations2
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAdvanced MIMO Systems OptimizationFrench-language works237,207