MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2992831948 · doi:10.1002/dac.4242

Optimal spectrum utilisation in cognitive radio networks based on processor sharing techniques

2019· article· en· W2992831948 on OpenAlexaff
H. M. Tsimba, B. T. Maharaj, Attahiru Sule Alfa

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Communication Systems · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicCognitive Radio Networks and Spectrum Sensing
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCognitive radioComputer scienceUnderlayQueueing theoryQueueTransmission (telecommunications)Interference (communication)Mathematical optimizationChannel (broadcasting)Cognitive networkFunction (biology)Transmitter power outputComputer networkTelecommunicationsTransmitterSignal-to-noise ratio (imaging)Wireless

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Summary Cognitive radio networks have achieved higher efficiency in terms of spectrum usage; however they do not readily solve any competition for access among secondary users. Optimisation is applied to an underlay network to obtain the optimal solution for at least two secondary users operating simultaneously on the same channel. Performance measures are used as the target for optimisation. However, the objective function is difficult to obtain in closed form. For the performance measures, queueing theory, particularly weighted processor sharing techniques are employed to model the system dynamics and behaviour. Transmission power and the interference temperature limit are used to allocate weights to the secondary users. Queue length and waiting time functions obtained from the queuing models are used for optimisation. After establishing that the objective function can be considered to be pseudo‐convex, convex programming is then deployed to obtain the optimised solution. The results suggest that there is indeed an improvement in network performance after optimisation. The immediate benefits of such a system are firstly improved spectrum utilisation through adding multiple secondary users and secondly, through optimisation, higher performance that can be achieved by the secondary users.

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)0.001
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 score0.830
Threshold uncertainty score0.524

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.288
Teacher spread0.267 · 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

Citations4
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Communication SystemsSame topicCognitive Radio Networks and Spectrum SensingFrench-language works237,207