MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2994942200 · doi:10.1109/lcomm.2019.2960350

Optimization of Rate Fairness in Multi-Pair Wireless-Powered Relaying Systems

2019· article· en· W2994942200 on OpenAlexafffund
Van-Phuc Bui, Van‐Dinh Nguyen, Hieu V. Nguyen, Octavia A. Dobre, Oh‐Soon Shin

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Communications Letters · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicEnergy Harvesting in Wireless Networks
Canadian institutionsMemorial University of Newfoundland
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaNational Research Foundation of KoreaMinistry of Education
KeywordsRelayComputer scienceWirelessIterative methodEnergy harvestingPower (physics)Fairness measureComputer networkWireless networkEnergy (signal processing)Efficient energy useOptimization problemMathematical optimizationAlgorithmElectrical engineeringTelecommunicationsThroughputMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This letter considers a multi-pair decode-and-forward relay network where a power-splitting (PS) protocol is adopted at the energy-constrained relay to provide simultaneous wireless information and energy harvesting (EH). To achieve higher efficiency of EH, we propose a new PS-based EH architecture at the relay by incorporating an alternating current (AC) computing logic, which is employed to directly use the wirelessly harvested AC energy for computational blocks. Under a nonlinear EH circuit, our goal is to maximize the fairness of end-to-end rate among user pairs subject to power constraints, resulting in a non-convex problem. We propose an iterative algorithm to achieve a suboptimal and efficient solution to this challenging problem by leveraging the inner approximation framework. Numerical results demonstrate that the proposed algorithm outperforms the traditional direct current computing and other baseline schemes.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.018

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.235
Teacher spread0.212 · 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

Citations2
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Communications LettersSame topicEnergy Harvesting in Wireless NetworksFrench-language works237,207