ARRANGEMENT OF STANDARD STRUCTURES FOR TILING THE PLANE FOR FREQUENCY AND AREA PLANNING OF IEEE 802.11 NETWORKS
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The problem of frequency and area planning arises quite regularly in designing wireless access networks. It can have a geometric interpretation in regard to the task of tiling the plane. Since the number of channels for each particular frequency planning is different depending on task requirements then the following can vary: shape of typical tiling structures (unit cells in terms of crystallography), their composition, organizing and procedure of tiling the plane, i.e., lattice type. Arrangement of unit cells makes it possible to propose the model that estimates the mutual influence between access points in distributed network and, thus, to draw a conclusion about applicability of chosen frequency plan for original task solution. This research paper examines standard structures for tiling the plane, defines planar lattices that conform to translational symmetry of such structures, and it proposes a method to taking into account the mutual influence between access points both within the structure and across the tiling plane. Since it is necessary to develop such a frequency plan that it would ensure most heavy filling of the plane with AP coverage areas, the maximum possible distance of cells in the same channel from each other, the maximum possible distance of cells of adjacent channels from each other and possible usage of all available frequency channels for the task, and then arrangement of standard structures of tiling (unit cells in terms of crystallography) should be done as part of the task. This research is dedicated to this problem. We do not intend to prove strictly mathematically unicity of all the proposed solutions. The research paper proposes geometrically sound approach to plane tiling by arranging plane tiling that is convenient in regard to specific features of IEEE 802.11 space distributed networks.
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 | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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) | 0.003 | 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".