MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3002929358 · doi:10.1155/2020/4189789

New Courteous Algorithm for Uplink Scheduling in LTE-Advanced and 5G Networks

2020· article· en· W3002929358 on OpenAlexafffund
Chafika Tata, Nassima Fellag, Michel Kadoch

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Computer Networks and Communications · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced Wireless Network Optimization
Canadian institutionsÉcole de Technologie Supérieure
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsComputer science3rd Generation Partnership Project 2LTE AdvancedQuality of serviceScheduling (production processes)Computer networkTelecommunications linkCellular networkThroughputWireless networkWirelessTelecommunicationsMathematical optimization

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The fast evolution of the number of wireless users and the emergence of new multimedia services have motivated third-generation partnership project (3GPP) to develop new radio access technologies. Thus, the carrier aggregation (CA) was introduced from version 10 long-term evolution (LTE), known as long-term evolution-advanced (LTE-A), to meet the increasing demands in terms of throughput and bandwidth and to ensure the Quality of Service (QoS) for different classes of bearers in LTE networks. However, such solution stills inefficient until implementing good resources management scheme. Several scheduling mechanisms have been proposed in the literature, to guarantee the QoS of different classes of bearers in LTE-A and 5G networks. Nevertheless, most of them promote high-priority bearers. In this study, a new approach of uplink scheduling resources has been developed. It aims to ensure service fairness of different traffic classes that allocates bearers over LTE-A and 5G networks. Also, it raises the number of admitted users in the network by increasing the number of admitted bearers through a dynamic management of service priorities. In fact, the low-priority traffic classes, using low-priority bearers, are favoured during a specific time interval, based on the average waiting time for each class. Simulation results show that the QoS parameters were much improved for the low-priority classes without significantly affecting the QoS of high priority ones.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.231
Teacher spread0.219 · 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
GenreMethods

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
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Computer Networks and CommunicationsSame topicAdvanced Wireless Network OptimizationFrench-language works237,207