Machine Learning-based Inter-Beam Inter-Cell Interference Mitigation in mmWave
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this paper, we address inter-beam inter-cell interference mitigation in 5G networks that employ millimetre-wave (mmWave), beamforming and non-orthogonal multiple access (NOMA) techniques. Those techniques play a key role in improving network capacity and spectral efficiency by multiplexing users on both spatial and power domains. In addition, the coverage area of multiple beams from different cells can intersect, allowing more flexibility in user-cell association. However, the intersection of coverage areas also implies increased inter-beam inter-cell interference, i.e. interference among beams formed by nearby cells. Therefore, joint user-cell association and inter-beam power allocation stand as a promising solution to mitigate inter-beam, inter-cell interference. In this paper, we consider a 5G mmWave network and propose a reinforcement learning algorithm to perform joint user-cell association and inter-beam power allocation to maximize the sum rate of the network. The proposed algorithm is compared to a uniform power allocation that equally divides power among beams per cell. Simulation results present a performance enhancement of 13 - 30% in network's sum-rate corresponding to the lowest and highest traffic loads, respectively.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 it