MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3159437800 · doi:10.1109/lnet.2021.3076409

Carrier Aggregation With Optimized UE Power Consumption in 5G

2021· article· en· W3159437800 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.

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Networking Letters · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced MIMO Systems Optimization
Canadian institutionsEricsson (Canada)University of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsThroughputComputer scienceUser equipmentQuality of servicePower consumptionConstraint (computer-aided design)Computer networkPower (physics)Reduction (mathematics)Real-time computingReliability engineeringTelecommunicationsBase stationEngineeringWirelessMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this letter, we consider 5G networks with Carrier Aggregation (CA). Our aim is to jointly select Component Carriers (CCs) and allocate Resource Blocks (RBs) such that total user throughput is maximized while user power consumption is minimized and Quality of Service (QoS) requirements are met. We formulate the User Equipment (UE) throughput and power consumption in terms of CC and RB indicators and propose a multi-objective optimization problem. Simulation results show that the proposed scheme outperforms the compared techniques by providing approximately 200mW reduction in power consumption while increasing the throughput by 2.7 times for users under short delay constraint.

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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.719
Threshold uncertainty score0.745

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.207
Teacher spread0.197 · 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