Placement, Orientation, and Resource Allocation Optimization for Cell-Free OIRS-Aided OWC Network
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The emergence of optical intelligent reflecting surface (OIRS) technologies marks a milestone in optical wireless communication (OWC) systems, enabling enhanced control over light propagation in indoor environments. This capability allows for the customization of channel conditions to achieve specific performance goals. This paper presents an enhancement in downlink cell-free OWC networks through the integration of OIRS. The key focus is on fine-tuning crucial parameters, including transmit power, receiver orientations, OIRS elements allocation, and strategic placement. In particular, a multi-objective optimization problem (MOOP) aimed at simultaneously improving the network's spectral efficiency (SE) and energy efficiency (EE) while adhering to the network's quality of service (QoS) constraints is formulated. The problem is solved by employing the$\epsilon$-constraint method to convert the MOOP into a single-objective optimization problem and solving it through successive convex approximation. Simulation results show the significant impact of OIRS on SE and EE, confirming its effectiveness in improving OWC network performance.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 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".