MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4234782911 · doi:10.1504/ijssc.2018.098691

On the target channel sequence selection for multiple handoffs in cognitive radio-based wireless regional area networks

2018· article· en· W4234782911 on OpenAlexaff
Nitin Gupta, Sanjay Kumar Dhurandher, Isaac Woungang, Joel J. P. C. Rodrigues

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Space-Based and Situated Computing · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicWireless Communication Networks Research
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCognitive radioHandoverChannel (broadcasting)Computer networkComputer scienceBenchmark (surveying)ThroughputTransmission (telecommunications)Scheme (mathematics)Sequence (biology)Selection (genetic algorithm)WirelessReal-time computingTelecommunicationsMachine learningGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In cognitive radio networks, handoff occurs when an unlicensed spectrum user has to switch to a new target channel from its current operating channel which a secondary user was using opportunistically. This situation raises whenever either the licensed primary user appears again or the channel's condition get worst. Substantial sensing time can be saved if a secondary user can make a proactive decision about selecting the future vacant target channel to resume the unfinished transmission before starting its transmission. This paper proposes a novel target channel sequence selection scheme for cognitive radio networks, which minimises the estimated service time of a secondary user by reducing the multiple handoffs. A non-iterative algorithm is implemented, which does not require the use of an exhaustive search technique as usual to determine the target channel sequence. Simulation results show that the proposed scheme outperforms both the random scheme and a considered benchmark scheme in terms of service time, cumulative handoff delay and throughput achieved by the secondary user.

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 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)0.001
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 score0.749
Threshold uncertainty score0.533

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.061
GPT teacher head0.312
Teacher spread0.251 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations0
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Space-Based and Situated ComputingSame topicWireless Communication Networks ResearchFrench-language works237,207