MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4324149179 · doi:10.1002/ett.4763

Resource allocation and user assignment schemes in cellular supported industrial IoT networks

2023· article· en· W4324149179 on OpenAlex
Lilatul Ferdouse, Ahmed Shaharyar Khwaja, Alagan Anpalagan, Brad Stimpson, Ali Arad, Isaac Woungang

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.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueTransactions on Emerging Telecommunications Technologies · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced MIMO Systems Optimization
Canadian institutionsIBM (Canada)Toronto Metropolitan UniversityWilfrid Laurier University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsSubcarrierComputer scienceResource allocationThroughputTelecommunications linkComputer networkInterference (communication)Cellular networkInternet of ThingsResource management (computing)Genetic algorithmMathematical optimizationWirelessOrthogonal frequency-division multiplexingTelecommunicationsMathematicsComputer security

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Industrial Internet of Things (IIoT) deployment underlying cellular networks has been drawing increasing attention in recent years. In this work, we consider group based resource allocation for industrial IoT networks where cellular‐IoT (C‐IoT) devices support uplink transmission for multiple IoT groups/clusters. The joint group and subcarrier optimization problem is formulated for maximizing the cell/group throughput under the optimal group member selection, subcarrier and minimum data rate constraints. Depending on the interference information, the interference aware group allocation (IA‐GA) is proposed to find the cellular user and cellular‐IoT device grouping for each subcarrier. However, to achieve the maximizing the cell/group throughput, another iterative algorithm, namely genetic algorithm based group allocation (GA‐GA) method is proposed, which provides an optimal solution for the user grouping in the most of the cases where an iterative technique is used for the sub‐carrier allocation. Simulations results show that the proposed IA‐GA and GA‐GA methods provide enhanced cell throughput gain and accessibility of the C‐IoTs.

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)0.000
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 score0.955
Threshold uncertainty score0.892

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.242
Teacher spread0.220 · 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