QoS-Aware Joint Component Carrier Selection and Resource Allocation for Carrier Aggregation in 5G
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Carrier Aggregation (CA) has been a breakthrough in LTE that led to increased throughput for users, and is still one of the key technologies in 5G that helps to enhance spectrum utilization. In CA, Component Carriers (CCs) are dynamically activated and deactivated depending on several performance factors. Optimal selection of CCs has been studied in the literature. However, the latency associated with activation and deactivation of CCs, control channel overhead for switching CCs, as well as the energy consumed for monitoring the active CCs have not been a part of the optimal CC selection problem. Nevertheless, those become stringent design constraints in practice. In this paper, we address optimal CC selection and resource allocation in 5G networks, where the above constraints are considered and the 5G network supports several service types with different 5G QoS Identifiers (5QI). The proposed optimum joint CC selection and Radio Resource Block (RB) allocation schemes maximize average throughput of users and satisfy QoS of users in terms of delay. In addition, the proposed schemes take CC activation and deactivation burden into consideration and aim to minimize the number of activations and deactivations. The simulation results demonstrate that our proposed solution outperforms the state of the art solution while satisfying the QoS requirements and creating close to 95.5% reduction on the number of CCs activations and deactivations.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it