Cross-Layer Scheduling and Beamforming in Smart-Grid Powered Cellular Networks With Heterogeneous Energy Coordination
Bibliographic record
Abstract
User scheduling, beamforming and energy coordination are investigated in smart-grid powered cellular networks (SGPCNs), where the base stations are powered by a smart grid and natural renewable energy sources. Heterogeneous energy coordination is considered in SGPCNs, namely energy merchandizing with the smart grid and energy exchanging among the base stations. A long-term grid-energy expenditure minimization problem with proportional-rate constraints is formulated for SGPCNs. Since user scheduling is coupled with the beamforming vectors, the formulated problem is challenging to handle via standard convex optimization methods. In practice, the beamforming vectors need to be updated over each slot according to the channel variations. User scheduling needs to be updated over several slots (frame) since the frequent scheduling of user equipment can cause reliability issues. Therefore, the Lyapunov optimization method is used to decouple the problem. A practical two-scale algorithm is proposed to schedule users at each frame, and obtain the beamforming vectors and amount of exchanged natural renewable energy at each slot. We prove that the proposed two-scale algorithm can asymptotically achieve the optimal solutions via tuning a control parameter. Numerical results verify the performance of the proposed two-scale algorithm.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".