QoS-Aware Joint Component Carrier Selection and Resource Allocation for Carrier Aggregation in 5G
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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".