Strategic Demand-Planning in Wireless Networks: Can Generative-AI Save Spectrum and Energy?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Generative-AI (GenAI), a novel technology capable of producing various types of outputs, including text, images, and videos, offers significant potential for wireless communications. This article introduces the concept of strategic demand-planning through demand-labeling, demand-shaping, and demand-rescheduling. Accordingly, GenAI is proposed as a powerful tool to facilitate demand-shaping in wireless networks. More specifically, GenAI is used to compress and convert the content of various types (e.g., from a higher bandwidth mode to a lower one, such as from a video to text), which subsequently enhanc-es performance of wireless networks in various usage scenarios, such as cell-switching, user association and load balancing, interference management, as well as disasters and unusual gatherings. Therefore, GenAI can serve a function in saving energy and spectrum in wireless networks. With recent advancements in AI, including sophisti-cated algorithms like large language models and the development of more powerful hardware built exclusively for AI tasks, such as AI accelerators, the concept of demand-planning, particularly demand-shaping through GenAI, becomes increasingly relevant. Furthermore, recent efforts to make GenAI accessible on devices, such as user terminals, make the implementation of this concept even more straightforward and feasible.
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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".