MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Commercial Dishes Can Be My Ladder: Sustainable and Collaborative Data Offloading in LEO Satellite Networks

2025· article· en· W7084057650 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicMathematical Biology Tumor Growth
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSoftware deploymentSatelliteSustainabilityThroughputOrchestrationRouting (electronic design automation)Energy consumptionQuality of serviceLow earth orbit

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Low Earth Orbit (LEO) satellite networks, characterized by their high data throughput and low latency, have gained significant interest from both industry and academia. Routing data efficiently within these networks is essential for maintaining a high quality of service. However, current routing strategies, such as bent-pipe and inter-satellite link (ISL) routing, have their unique challenges. The bent-pipe strategy requires a dense deployment of dedicated ground stations, while the ISL-based strategy can negatively impact satellite battery lifespan due to increased traffic load, leading to sustainability issues. In this paper, we propose sustainable collaborative offloading, a framework that orchestrates groups of existing commercial resources like ground stations and 5G base stations for data offloading. This orchestration enhances total capacity, overcoming the limitations of a single resource. We propose the collaborator group set construction algorithm to construct candidate groups and the collaborator selection and total payment algorithm to select offloading targets and determine payments no less than the costs. Extensive real-world-based simulations show that our solution significantly improves energy consumption, satellite service life, and end-to-end latency.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.524
Threshold uncertainty score0.692

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.041
GPT teacher head0.331
Teacher spread0.290 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
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 topicMathematical Biology Tumor GrowthFrench-language works237,207