MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3030158821 · doi:10.1109/tcomm.2020.2996737

Sum Power Minimization With Mixed Power and QoS Bounded Constraints

2020· article· en· W3030158821 on OpenAlexaff
Peter He

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Communications · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced MIMO Systems Optimization
Canadian institutionsOntario Tech University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMathematical optimizationInterior point methodComputer sciencePower (physics)ThroughputDistributed powerPower optimizationWirelessMathematicsPower consumptionTelecommunications

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In the incoming communication system, especially for the battery constrained Internet of Things devices, consumption of power resources will be a critical performance metric. This point shows importance when throughput minimal requirement and interference limit have been carried out. This paper investigates such a power allocation problem in a multiple-parallel-channel wireless system to minimize the sum power consumed by the entire system, while meeting the sum power constrains for each group of channels and the whole system as well as meeting the throughput constraints for each of the groups and the system. Sum power minimization itself is also a key issue for margin-adaptive loading. Resorting to geometric concepts, an algorithm named as the group virtual bottom power water-filling (GVB-PWF) is proposed to solve the problem, including the large-scale problems, which computes the exact solution with a low degree of the polynomial computational complexity. Optimality of the proposed algorithm is also proved strictly. To the best of our knowledge, no prior algorithm in the open literature offered such an optimal solution to the proposed problem, with the merit of exactness and efficiency. Simulation results demonstrate that the proposed power allocation algorithm uses less power about 25%, compared with the popular primal-dual interior-point method with the same amount of computations.

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: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.970
Threshold uncertainty score0.791

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.229
Teacher spread0.211 · 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
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

Citations3
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on CommunicationsSame topicAdvanced MIMO Systems OptimizationFrench-language works237,207