MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3112166140 · doi:10.1109/lnet.2020.3045070

Power Allocation in CoMP-Empowered C-NOMA Networks

2020· article· en· W3112166140 on OpenAlexafffund
Mohamed Elhattab, Mohamed Amine Arfaoui, Chadi Assi

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Networking Letters · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced Wireless Communication Technologies
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
FundersFonds de recherche du Québec – Nature et technologiesConcordia University
KeywordsNomaComputer scienceSingle antenna interference cancellationMathematical optimizationQuality of serviceInterference (communication)Power (physics)HeuristicComputational complexity theoryOptimization problemPower controlScheme (mathematics)Transmission (telecommunications)Cellular networkPower optimizationChannel (broadcasting)Computer networkTelecommunications linkMathematicsAlgorithmTelecommunications

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this letter, the dynamic power allocation problem of a cellular network consisting of two adjacent and coordinating cells is investigated. The joint transmission coordinated multipoint (JT-CoMP) between the two-cell is introduced to assist users experiencing high inter-cell interference, where each cell invokes cooperative non orthogonal multiple access (C-NOMA) to serve its associated devices. Both effects of imperfect successive interference cancellation (SIC) and imperfect channel estimation are considered within the proposed scheme. A power allocation framework is formulated as an optimization problem with the objective of maximizing the network sum-rate while guaranteeing a certain quality-of-service (QoS) for each user. The formulated optimization problem is neither concave nor quasi-concave, which is difficult to be solved directly unless using heuristic methods, which comes with the expense of high computational complexity. To overcome this issue, a near-optimal closed-form expressions for the power allocation are derived. The simulation results show that our purposed scheme achieves an average sum-rate that is 3% less than the one of the optimal power control but it can save up to 99% in the computational time. In addition, the superiority of the proposed CoMP C-NOMA scheme is demonstrated when compared to the well known C-NOMA scheme.

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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.212
Teacher spread0.196 · 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 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

Citations22
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Networking LettersSame topicAdvanced Wireless Communication TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207