MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3024219290 · doi:10.1109/mce.2020.2986834

LTE IoT Technology Enhancements and Case Studies

2020· article· en· W3024219290 on OpenAlexafffund
F. John Dian, Reza Vahidnia

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Consumer Electronics Magazine · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicIoT Networks and Protocols
Canadian institutionsBritish Columbia Institute of Technology
FundersBritish Columbia Institute of Technology
KeywordsComputer scienceInteroperabilityQuality of serviceScalability3rd Generation Partnership Project 2LPWANComputer networkInternet of ThingsTelecommunicationsComputer security

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Many devices and machines used in diverse applications require ubiquitous connectivity to the Internet through cellular network. These devices have different requirements in terms of their location, data rates, mobility, energy consumption, latency, complexity, power output level, spectrum, and security. These criteria impose specific requirements on the network infrastructure. While some Internet of Things (IoT) enabling technologies exist today that may be able to address the wide area coverage requirement of the IoT devices, they fall short as compared to the 3rd Generation Partnership Project (3GPP) technology in terms of coverage, scalability, interoperability, Quality of Service (QoS), and security. 3GPP Release 13 introduced two categories of IoT technologies called LTE-M and narrow band IoT (NB-IoT). In LTE release, 14, and 15, the enhancements of LTE IoT continued to provide cellular IoT connectivity to more IoT devices and in more diverse applications. In this article, we provide an overview of the evolution from Releases 13 to 15 (a rich technology roadmap toward 5G), and for multiple different use cases discuss the technology requirements that need to be met for each specific application.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.017

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.275
Teacher spread0.252 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations31
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Consumer Electronics MagazineSame topicIoT Networks and ProtocolsFrench-language works237,207