Fair Resource Allocation in Cooperative Cognitive Radio Iot Networks
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Due to the growing demand for spectral resources with the emergence of IoT networks and applications, cooperative cognitive radio IoT networks (CCR-IoTN) are expected to play an essential role in the world of smart technology. In this paradigm, the benefits of cooperative communication and cognitive radio networks (CRN) are merged to meet IoT networks' needs. In this work, we employ the hybrid overlay-underlay CRN to guarantee both the secondary user (SU) stability and provide acceptable total throughput. In our CCR-IoTN, SUs may act as a relay to help the primary transmission. If the primary user (PU) is active, the secondary non-relay nodes transmit concurrently with the PU in underlay mode. In return for their cooperation, SUs are allowed to access the spectrum to transmit their data in overlay mode. In this context, we propose several fair resource allocation frameworks and compare well-known problems such as spectrum efficiency, energy efficiency as an objective function for CCR-IoTN. This kind of problem is inherently nonconvex. To solve the problems, therefore, we reformulate them as a convex problem using quadratic transform. Finally, we use simulation to evaluate the performance of the proposed hybrid resource allocation method. The resource allocation framework based on proportional fairness policy is shown to have acceptable performance in terms of throughput, fairness, and energy efficiency.
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 | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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".