LoRa Resource Allocation Algorithm for Higher Data Rates
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
LoRa modulation is a widely used technology known for its long-range transmission capabilities, making it ideal for applications with low data rate requirements, such as IoT-enabled sensor networks. However, its inherent low data rate poses a challenge for applications that require higher throughput, such as video surveillance and disaster monitoring, where large image files must be transmitted over long distances in areas with limited communication infrastructure. In this paper, we introduce the LoRa Resource Allocation (LRA) algorithm, designed to address these limitations by enabling parallel transmissions, thereby reducing the total transmission time (Ttx) and increasing the bit rate (BR). The LRA algorithm leverages the quasi-orthogonality of LoRa’s Spreading Factors (SFs) and employs specially designed end devices equipped with dual LoRa transceivers, each operating on a distinct SF. For experimental analysis we choose an image transmission application and investigate various parameter combinations affecting Ttx to optimize interference, BR, and image quality. Experimental results show that our proposed algorithm reduces Ttx by 42.36% and 19.98% for SF combinations of seven and eight, and eight and nine, respectively. In terms of BR, we observe improvements of 73.5% and 24.97% for these same combinations. Furthermore, BER analysis confirms that the LRA algorithm delivers high-quality images at SNR levels above −5 dB in line-of-sight communication scenarios.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 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 it