MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Energy-efficient relaying for cooperative cellular wireless networks

2012· book-chapter· en· W938248294 on OpenAlexaff
Yifei Wei, Mei Song, F. Richard Yu

Bibliographic record

VenueCambridge University Press eBooks · 2012
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicCooperative Communication and Network Coding
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTelecommunicationsCellular networkMobile phonePopulationInternet accessThe InternetBusinessEngineeringComputer scienceWorld Wide Web

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction The continuously growing demand for ubiquitous network access has led to the rapid development of wireless cellular networks during the last decade. The subscriber number and service traffic in cellular networks have explosively escalated. It is reported that there are now more than 5 billion mobile phone connections worldwide, and more than a billion mobile phone connections have been added globally in just 18 months [1]. The Asia-Pacific region including India and China is the main source of growth, accounting for 47% of global mobile connections at the end of June 2010. The penetration of mobile phones is growing rapidly in developing countries, and the number of subscribers will be astounding, since the world population is expected to reach 9.15 billion in 2050. In parallel with the rapid growth of the number of connections, the service types and traffic load have experienced significant evolvement from voice and short messaging service (SMS) to video and multimedia internet. Such tremendous growth in the information and communication technology (ICT) industry has made it become one of the leading sources of world energy consumption and it is expected to grow dramatically in the future. There are currently more than 4 million base stations (BSs) serving mobile users, each consuming an average of 25 MWh per year. In 2007, four Chinese operators consumed 20 billion KWh, which is equivalent to 8 million tons of coal combustion. ICT already represents around 2%of total carbon emissions, and this is expected to increase from 0.53 billion tonnes (Gt) carbon dioxide equivalent (CO2e) in 2002 to 1.43GtCO2e in 2020 [2].

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.020

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.002

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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.212
Teacher spread0.177 · 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
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCambridge University Press eBooks→Same topicCooperative Communication and Network Coding→French-language works237,207→