MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3000387598 · doi:10.1109/mwc.001.1900062

Cloud Based mmWave WLANs: Architectural Paradigms, Proposals and Perspectives

2020· article· en· W3000387598 on OpenAlexaff
Kaijun Cheng, Xuming Fang, Xianbin Wang

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Wireless Communications · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMillimeter-Wave Propagation and Modeling
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceCloud computingTelecommunicationsComputer networkOperating system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

With the explosive growth of data traffic over wireless access networks, the use of the millimeter- wave band becomes inevitable due to the spectrum scarcity in lower frequencies and the availability of large chunks of underutilized spectrum in this band. The rapid evolution of wireless technologies and co-existence of legacy and emerging wireless infrastructures are leading to complex network operation scenarios. For instance, to achieve the orchestration of co-existed networks and a large number of devices, dynamic operations of conventional distributed WLANs will become extremely challenging. Various technologies such as dense network deployment, dual-band cooperation, C-RAN, and AI, which have been developed for cellular networks, could be adopted to achieve intelligent and efficient WLAN operations. To meet the future traffic requirements of evolving WLAN, this article first outlines the architecture of future WLAN and the corresponding challenges. A centralized control architecture, named WLAN C-RAN, is proposed to achieve orchestrated coordination and improved network throughput. Critical technologies of WLAN C-RAN, for example, dual-band protocol stack and resource management schemes are also developed, and the simulation results demonstrate the improvements on system capacity. Finally, we present some potential challenges and feasible solutions for the future WLAN.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.808
Threshold uncertainty score0.587

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 head0.070
GPT teacher head0.252
Teacher spread0.182 · 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
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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