MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Data-Driven Spectrum Demand Prediction: A Spatio-Temporal Framework with Transfer Learning

2025· article· W4417282062 on OpenAlexaff
Amin Farajzadeh, Hongzhao Zheng, Sarah Dumoulin, Tae Hee Ha, Halim Yanıkömeroğlu, Amir Ghasemi

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Language
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced Data and IoT Technologies
Canadian institutionsCommunications Research Centre CanadaCarleton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsExploitKey (lock)Generalizability theorySpectrum managementWirelessCrowdsourcingFeature (linguistics)Reliability (semiconductor)Spectral efficiency

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Accurate spectrum demand prediction is crucial for informed spectrum allocation, effective regulatory planning, and fostering sustainable growth in modern wireless communication networks. It supports governmental efforts, particularly those led by the international telecommunication union (ITU), to establish fair spectrum allocation policies, improve auction mechanisms, and meet the requirements of emerging technologies such as advanced 5G, forthcoming 6G, and the internet of things (IoT). This paper presents an effective spatio-temporal prediction framework that leverages crowdsourced user-side key performance indicators (KPIs) and regulatory datasets to model and forecast spectrum demand. The proposed methodology achieves superior prediction accuracy and cross-regional generalizability by incorporating advanced feature engineering, comprehensive correlation analysis, and transfer learning techniques. Unlike traditional ITU models, which are often constrained by arbitrary inputs and unrealistic assumptions, this approach exploits granular, data-driven insights to account for spatial and temporal variations in spectrum utilization. Comparative evaluations against ITU estimates, as the benchmark, underscore our framework’s capability to deliver more realistic and actionable predictions. Experimental results validate the efficacy of our methodology, highlighting its potential as a robust approach for policymakers and regulatory bodies to enhance spectrum management and planning.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
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 score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.032

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.246
Teacher spread0.231 · 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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAdvanced Data and IoT TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207