MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4297350611 · doi:10.48550/arxiv.1710.01272

Coverage and Rate Analysis for Co-Existing RF/VLC Downlink Cellular\n Networks

2017· preprint· W4297350611 on OpenAlexaff
Hina Tabassum, Ekram Hossain

Bibliographic record

VenuearXiv (Cornell University) · 2017
Typepreprint
Language
FieldEngineering
TopicOptical Wireless Communication Technologies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsVisible light communicationStochastic geometryComputer scienceTelecommunications linkBase stationComputer networkTransmitter power outputCoverage probabilityInterference (communication)Real-time computingRadio frequencyElectronic engineeringTransmitterTelecommunicationsElectrical engineeringEngineeringMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper provides a stochastic geometry framework to perform the coverage\nand rate analysis of a typical user in co-existing VLC and RF networks covering\na large indoor area. The developed framework can be customized to capture the\nperformance of a typical user in various network configurations such as (i)\nRF-only, in which only small base-stations (SBSs) are available to provide the\ncoverage to a user, (ii) VLC-only, in which only optical BSs (OBSs) are\navailable to provide the coverage to a user, (iii) opportunistic RF/VLC, where\na user selects the network with maximum received signal power, and (iv) hybrid\nRF/VLC, where a user can simultaneously utilize the available resources from\nboth RF and VLC networks. The developed model for VLC network precisely\ncaptures the impact of the field-of-view (FOV) of the photo-detector (PD)\nreceiver on the number of interferers, distribution of the aggregate\ninterference, association probability, and the coverage of a typical user.\nClosed-form approximations are presented for special cases of practical\ninterest and for asymptotic scenarios such as when the intensity of SBSs\nbecomes very low. The derived expressions enable us to obtain closed-form\nsolutions for various network design parameters (such as intensity of OBSs and\nSBSs, transmit power, and/or FOV) such that the number of active users can be\ndistributed optimally among RF and VLC networks. Also, we optimize the network\nparameters in order to prioritize the association of users to VLC network.\nFinally, simulations are carried out to verify the derived analytical\nsolutions. Important trade-offs between height and intensity of OBSs are\nhighlighted to optimize the performance of a user in VLC networks.\n

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Research integrity
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 score0.765
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0030.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
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 head0.090
GPT teacher head0.217
Teacher spread0.127 · 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.

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
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuearXiv (Cornell University)Same topicOptical Wireless Communication TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207