MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Partial NOMA-Based Resource Allocation for Fairness in LTE-U System

2019· article· en· W3009273577 on OpenAlexaff
Hongli He, Hangguan Shan, Aiping Huang, Qiang Ye, Weihua Zhuang

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced Wireless Communication Technologies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNomaComputer scienceRobustness (evolution)Computer networkSpectrum managementExploitMultiplexingSpectral efficiencyResource allocationChannel (broadcasting)WirelessTelecommunications linkTelecommunicationsCognitive radio

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In order to tackle the spectrum scarcity problem and enhance the spectrum efficiency, deploying LTE in unlicensed band (LTE-U) is an emerging technology for supporting massive connections in future networks. By taking into account of the coexistence between the LTE-U cellular user equipments (CUEs) and the legacy Wi-Fi stations (STAs) in the unlicensed band, a partial non-orthogonal multiple access (NOMA)-based scheme is proposed in this paper. By dividing all UEs into two groups and making the Wi-Fi STA as the UE with the weakest channel gain in its group, we can exploit the multiplexing gain of NOMA by introducing no extra modification to Wi-Fi STAs. Accordingly, a fairness-oriented resource allocation framework is formulated as a max-min problem to jointly optimize the inter-group time occupancy ratio and the intra-group power allocation when the guaranteed bit rate (GBR) requirements for each UE are considered. A modified two-dimensional bisection algorithm is proposed to search the optimal time occupancy ratio and the max-min rate in this coexisting network. Numerical results validate the effectiveness of the partial NOMA scheme and outperform the traditional orthogonal multiple access method, in terms of both efficiency and robustness.

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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.828
Threshold uncertainty score0.332

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.216
Teacher spread0.207 · 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

Citations8
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAdvanced Wireless Communication TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207