MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4299048940 · doi:10.48550/arxiv.1603.03725

A Multi-Channel Spectrum Sensing Fusion Mechanism for Cognitive Radio\n Networks: Design and Application to IEEE 802.22 WRANs

2016· preprint· W4299048940 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenuearXiv (Cornell University) · 2016
Typepreprint
Language
FieldComputer Science
TopicDistributed Sensor Networks and Detection Algorithms
Canadian institutionsInstitut National de la Recherche ScientifiqueUniversité du Québec à Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCognitive radioComputer scienceFalse alarmIEEE 802.11Computer networkWirelessBandwidth (computing)Radio spectrumInterference (communication)Channel (broadcasting)Transmission (telecommunications)Wireless networkTelecommunicationsArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The IEEE 802.22 is a new cognitive radio standard that is aimed at extending\nwireless outreach to rural areas. Known as wireless regional area networks, and\ndesigned based on the not-to-interfere spectrum sharing model, WRANs are\nchannelized and centrally-controlled networks working on the under-utilized\nUHF/VHF TV bands to establish communication with remote users, so-called\ncustomer premises equipment (CPEs). Despite the importance of reliable and\ninterference-free operation in these frequencies, spectrum sensing fusion\nmechanisms suggested in IEEE 802.22 are rudimentary and fail to satisfy the\nstringent mandated sensing requirements. Other deep-rooted shortcomings are\nperformance non-uniformity over different signal-to-noise-ratio regimes,\nunbalanced performance, instability and lack of flexibility. Inspired by these\nobservations, in this paper we propose a distributed spectrum sensing technique\nfor WRANs, named multi-channel learning-based distributed sensing fusion\nmechanism (MC-LDS). MC-LDS is demonstrated to be self-trained, stable and to\ncompensate for fault reports through its inherent reward-penalty approach.\nMoreover, MC-LDS exhibits a better uniform performance in all traffic regimes,\nis fair (reduces the false-alarm/misdetection gap), adjustable (works with\nseveral degrees of freedom) and bandwidth efficient (opens transmission\nopportunities for more CPEs). Simulation results and comparisons unanimously\ncorroborate that MC-LDS outperforms IEEE 802.22 recommended algorithms, i.e.,\nthe AND, OR and VOTING rules.\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.

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)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.969
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.049
GPT teacher head0.199
Teacher spread0.149 · 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