MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4402510167 · doi:10.1109/tvt.2024.3459046

Design and Performance Analysis of MEC-Aided LoRa Networks With Power Control

2024· article· en· W4402510167 on OpenAlexaff
Qianru Cheng, Guofa Cai, Jiguang He, Georges Kaddoum

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Vehicular Technology · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicIoT Networks and Protocols
Canadian institutionsÉcole de Technologie SupérieureUniversité du Québec à Montréal
FundersNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsPower (physics)Control (management)Computer scienceEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, we propose a single-cell mobile edge computing (MEC) assisted long-range (LoRa) network with power control, which includes a gateway, a MEC server, and many randomly distributed end-devices (EDs). In the proposed system, task packet messages can be computed locally through EDs and offloaded to the MEC server for edge computation; both computations are performed in parallel. Following the stochastic geometry theory, we adopt the homogeneous Poisson point process (PPP) to capture the randomness of the EDs' position and model the interference devices as PPP under the pure ALOHA. In this model, we consider both the interference caused by the same spreading factors (co-SF) and that caused by different spreading factors (inter-SF) during task offloading. Furthermore, we derive precise and approximated expressions of the computation offloading success probabilities for the proposed network, which are then verified by simulations. This is followed by the analysis of the impact of the power control on the network performance of the proposed network. The results reveal that power control can considerably improve the performance in the low-density EDs scenario, as well as slightly improve in the high-density EDs scenario. Finally, we investigate the performance of the proposed network by comparing three SF allocation schemes-namely, exponential windowing (EW), equal-interval-based (EIB), and equal-area-based (EAB) schemes. The results reveal that we can improve the performance by assigning a lower SF for a large number of EDs.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.198
Teacher spread0.193 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations2
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Vehicular TechnologySame topicIoT Networks and ProtocolsFrench-language works237,207