MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3136350876 · doi:10.1109/jiot.2021.3068061

Massive IoT Access With NOMA in 5G Networks and Beyond Using Online Competitiveness and Learning

2021· article· en· W3136350876 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Internet of Things Journal · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced Wireless Communication Technologies
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Sherbrooke
FundersFonds de recherche du Québec – Nature et technologiesNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsNomaComputer scienceScheduling (production processes)Reinforcement learningMathematical optimizationInternet of ThingsDistributed computingInteger programmingComputer networkAlgorithmArtificial intelligenceTelecommunications linkMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article studies the problem of online user grouping, scheduling, and power allocation for massive Internet of Things (IoT) access in beyond 5G networks using nonorthogonal multiple access (NOMA). NOMA has been identified as a promising technology to accommodate a large number of devices using a limited number of radio resources. In this work, the objective is to maximize the number of served devices while allocating their transmission powers such that their real-time requirements as well as their limited operating energy are respected. First, we formulate the problem as a mixed-integer nonlinear program (MINLP) that can be transformed to MILP for some special cases. Second, we study its NP-hardness in different cases. Then, by dividing the problem into multiple NOMA grouping and scheduling subproblems, an efficient online competitive algorithm is proposed to solve each subproblem. Next, we show how to use the proposed online algorithm as a black box and how to combine the obtained solutions to each subproblem in a reinforcement learning setting to obtain the power allocation for each NOMA group. Our analyses are supplemented by simulation results to illustrate the performance of the proposed algorithms in comparison to optimal and state-of-the-art methods.

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 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: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.135
Threshold uncertainty score0.436

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 integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.262
Teacher spread0.246 · 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