MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3203092761 · doi:10.1109/tnsm.2022.3202200

Planning 5G Networks for Rural Fixed Wireless Access

2022· article· en· W3203092761 on OpenAlexaff
Andrew Lappalainen, Yuhao Zhang, Catherine Rosenberg

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Network and Service Management · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced MIMO Systems Optimization
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTelecommunications linkComputer scienceComputer networkBroadbandMIMOPrecodingLimit (mathematics)Wireless networkBandwidth (computing)Base stationFixed pointWirelessTopology (electrical circuits)TelecommunicationsMathematicsChannel (broadcasting)Electrical engineeringEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We study the planning of a rural 5G multi-user massive MIMO fixed wireless access system to offer fixed broadband service to homes. Specifically, we aim to determine the user limit, i.e., the maximum number of homes that can simultaneously receive target minimum bit rates (MBRs) on the downlink (DL) and on the uplink (UL) given a set of network resources and a cell radius. To compute that limit, we must understand how resources should be shared between the DL and UL and how user and stream selection, precoding and combining, and power distribution should be performed. We use block diagonalization and propose a static grouping strategy that organizes homes into fixed groups (of possibly different sizes) in the DL and UL; then we develop a simple approach to compute the user limit that we validate numerically. We study the impact of group size and show that smaller groups yield larger user limits in a 3.5 GHz band. We show how the user limit at different cell radii is impacted by the system bandwidth, the number of antennas at the base station and homes, the transmit power, and the MBRs. Lastly, we offer insights into how the network could be operated.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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 score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.024

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.234
Teacher spread0.221 · 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

Citations19
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Network and Service ManagementSame topicAdvanced MIMO Systems OptimizationFrench-language works237,207