MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4412836976 · doi:10.1109/ojcoms.2025.3594950

XR Streaming Performance With Wi-Fi 7 Multi-Link Operation

2025· article· en· W4412836976 on OpenAlexaff
Marc Carrascosa, Lorenzo Galati Giordano, Francesc Wilhelmi, Gianluca Fontanesi, Anders Jönsson, Giovanni Geraci, Boris Bellalta

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Open Journal of the Communications Society · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced Wireless Network Optimization
Canadian institutionsCanadian Standards Association
FundersAgencia Estatal de InvestigaciónHORIZON EUROPE Framework ProgrammeMinisterio de Ciencia e Innovación
KeywordsLink (geometry)Computer networkComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Extended Reality (XR) has stringent throughput and delay requirements that are hard to meet with current wireless technologies. Missing these requirements can lead to worsened picture quality, perceived lag between user input and corresponding output, and even dizziness for the end user. In this paper, we study the capability of Wi-Fi 7, and its novel support for Multi-Link Operation (MLO), to cope with these tight requirements. Our study is based on simulation results extracted from an MLO-compliant simulator that realistically reproduces VR traffic. Results show that MLO can sustain Virtual Reality (VR) applications. By jointly using multiple links with independent channel access procedures, MLO can reduce the overall delay, which is especially useful in the uplink, as it has more stringent requirements than the downlink, and is instrumental in delivering the expected performance. We show that using MLO can support more users per Access Point (AP) than an equivalent number of links using Single Link Operation (SLO). We also show that, while maintaining the same overall bandwidth, a higher number of MLO links with narrower channels leads to lower delays than a lower number of links with wider channels. We also study the impact of Overlapping Basic Service Sets (OBSS) on performance of XR applications, showing how SLO struggles to maintain a low delay when OBSS activity increases, and how MLO can cope with this interference by using MLO-aware channel assignment strategies. Finally, we consider random positioning for the users, showcasing that MLO can support 5× more users than SLO.

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)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.283
Teacher spread0.257 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Open Journal of the Communications SocietySame topicAdvanced Wireless Network OptimizationFrench-language works237,207