Optimizing Cell Sizes for Ultra-Reliable Low-Latency Communications in 5G Wireless Networks
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The millimeter-wave (mmWave) band with large antenna arrays and dense base station deployments has become the prime candidate for 5G mobile systems and key enabler for ultra-reliable low-latency communications (URLLC). In this paper, we propose an approach to estimating the optimal cell sizes of 5G networks that support URLLC services by combining both physical and data link layers, leveraging concepts from stochastic geometry and queuing theory. Furthermore, the impacts of the densification of base stations on the average blocking probability, which are of practical interest, are investigated with numerical results. The results show that the signal-to-noise-and-interference ratio (SINR) coverage probability and the average blocking probability achieve optimal values at different cell sizes. Moreover, the differences between the two types of optimal values become more significant with higher SINR thresholds. Our results suggest that traditional SINR-based approach for cell sizing will cause over-provisioning of base stations and significantly higher costs. Specifically, we share the insight that the interactions between SINR at physical layer and retransmission at link layer contribute to varying cost saving.
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".