MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3181432070 · doi:10.1109/jiot.2021.3095126

Reliability Benefit of Location-Based Relay Selection for Cognitive Relay Networks

2021· article· en· W3181432070 on OpenAlexaff
Zhi Yan, Huimin Kong, Wei Wang, Hongli Liu, Xuemin Shen

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Internet of Things Journal · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicWireless Communication Security Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
FundersNatural Science Foundation of Hunan ProvinceChina Scholarship CouncilNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsRelayReliability (semiconductor)Computer scienceTransmission (telecommunications)Selection (genetic algorithm)Overhead (engineering)Computer networkStochastic geometryReliability engineeringTelecommunicationsStatisticsMathematicsArtificial intelligenceEngineeringPower (physics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this article, we develop an analytical framework to study the impact of location-based relay selection strategy on the reliability of cognitive relay networks. By utilizing the tool of stochastic geometry, we first derive a closed-form expression for the reliability-enhanced region (RER), where relaying transmission can achieve higher transmission reliability than direct transmission. Then, we adopt the normalized reliability gain (NRG) to quantify the reliability benefit obtained by using relaying transmission compared to direct transmission, and we obtain the spatial distribution of NRG in the RER. Subsequently, by taking the spatial random nature of relays’ distribution into account, we investigate the reliability benefit obtained by secondary networks with the optimal location-based relay selection (OLB-RS) strategy. To reduce the feedback overhead during relay selection, we propose a region-aware relay selection (RA-RS) strategy and obtain the achievable reliability benefit. The results indicate that the reliability is highly dependent on the location of relay, and the OLB-RS strategy is to select the relay closest to the midpoint between the corresponding secondary source and destination.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.255
Teacher spread0.243 · 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

Citations7
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Internet of Things JournalSame topicWireless Communication Security TechniquesFrench-language works237,207