MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4396564053 · doi:10.1109/lcomm.2024.3396050

Joint Spectrum Partitioning and Power Allocation for Energy Efficient Semi-Integrated Sensing and Communications

2024· article· en· W4396564053 on OpenAlexafffund
Ammar Mohamed Abouelmaati, Sylvester Aboagye, Hina Tabassum

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Communications Letters · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicCognitive Radio Networks and Spectrum Sensing
Canadian institutionsUniversity of GuelphYork University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsComputer scienceQuality of serviceWirelessResource allocationComputer networkPower budgetBandwidth (computing)Distributed computingSpectral efficiencyConvex optimizationEfficient energy usePower (physics)Regular polygonTelecommunicationsPower controlEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

With spectrum resources becoming congested and the emergence of sensing-enabled wireless applications, conventional resource allocation methods need a revamp to support communications-only, sensing-only, and integrated sensing and communication (ISaC) services together. In this letter, we propose two joint spectrum partitioning (SP) and power allocation (PA) schemes to maximize the aggregate sensing and communication performance as well as corresponding energy efficiency (EE) of a semi-ISaC system that supports all three services in a unified manner. The proposed framework captures the priority of the distinct services, impact of target clutters, power budget and bandwidth constraints, and sensing and communication quality-of-service (QoS) requirements. We reveal that the former problem is jointly convex and the latter is a non-convex problem that can be solved optimally by exploiting fractional and parametric programming techniques. Numerical results verify the effectiveness of proposed schemes and extract novel insights related to the impact of the priority and QoS requirements of distinct services on the performance of semi-ISaC networks.

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)0.000
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.974
Threshold uncertainty score0.707

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.254
Teacher spread0.229 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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

Citations7
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Communications LettersSame topicCognitive Radio Networks and Spectrum SensingFrench-language works237,207