Smart performance optimization of energy‐aware scheduling model for resource sharing in 5G green communication systems
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract This paper presents an analysis of the performance of the Energy Aware Scheduling Algorithm (EASA) in a 5G green communication system. 5G green communication systems rely on EASA to manage resource sharing. The aim of the proposed model is to improve the efficiency and energy consumption of resource sharing in 5G green communication systems. The main objective is to address the challenges of achieving optimal resource utilization and minimizing energy consumption in these systems. To achieve this goal, the study proposes a novel energy‐aware scheduling model that takes into consideration the specific characteristics of 5G green communication systems. This model incorporates intelligent techniques for optimizing resource allocation and scheduling decisions, while also considering energy consumption constraints. The methodology used involves a combination of mathematical analysis and simulation studies. The mathematical analysis is used to formulate the optimization problem and design the scheduling model, while the simulations are used to evaluate its performance in various scenarios. The proposed EASM reached a 91.58% false discovery rate, a 64.33% false omission rate, a 90.62% prevalence threshold, and a 91.23% critical success index. The results demonstrate the effectiveness of the proposed model in terms of reducing energy consumption while maintaining a high level of resource utilization.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".