pith. sign in

arxiv: 2604.17493 · v1 · submitted 2026-04-19 · 💻 cs.NI

Scheduling in Multi-Hop Wireless Networks With Deadlines

Nicholas Jones , Eytan Modiano This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-10 05:42 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 💻 cs.NI
keywords multi-hop wireless networkspacket schedulingend-to-end deadlinesnetwork slicingpinwheel schedulingthroughput optimizationdecentralized algorithmsinterference models
0
0 comments X

The pith

A decentralized polynomial-time algorithm meets tight end-to-end packet deadlines in multi-hop wireless networks while staying near throughput-optimal.

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The paper studies scheduling in wireless networks to satisfy both instantaneous throughput targets and hard per-packet deadlines across multiple hops. It adopts a network slicing model that separates the queueing behavior of different flows even when they share the wireless medium. Analysis shows that keeping queues stable is not enough: under some stabilizing policies, packet delays can become arbitrarily large when flows interfere. The authors derive explicit bounds on end-to-end delay in terms of how often each link is scheduled, then reduce the problem of choosing those frequencies to a generalized pinwheel scheduling task that works for any interference pattern. They conclude by giving a decentralized algorithm that solves this task in polynomial time and keeps throughput close to the maximum possible.

Core claim

Under the network slicing model, throughput- and deadline-optimal policies can be characterized for an isolated flow; these policies give feasibility bounds for the general multi-flow case. In the multi-flow setting, packet delays grow arbitrarily large under a worst-case stabilizing policy, proving that queue stability alone does not guarantee tight deadlines. End-to-end delays are bounded by the maximum inter-scheduling time of each link along a flow's path. Hard guarantees become possible under arbitrary interference by choosing inter-scheduling times that solve a generalized pinwheel scheduling problem. A decentralized polynomial-time algorithm exists that meets the resulting deadlines.

What carries the argument

The generalized pinwheel scheduling problem that selects periodic link activation frequencies whose inter-scheduling times satisfy the per-link delay bounds needed for end-to-end deadline feasibility.

If this is right

  • Queue stability is not sufficient to guarantee tight deadlines, since delays can grow without bound under some stabilizing policies in the multi-flow case.
  • End-to-end packet delays are determined by the inter-scheduling times of the links along each path.
  • Hard deadline guarantees can be achieved for any interference model by solving the generalized pinwheel scheduling problem for the required inter-scheduling times.
  • A decentralized polynomial-time algorithm can simultaneously meet the deadlines and maintain near-optimal throughput.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • Because the slicing model allows per-flow analysis, deadline requirements could be enforced independently on different network slices without recalculating the entire schedule.
  • The gap between stability and deadline satisfaction implies that wireless systems may need separate mechanisms to control inter-scheduling times rather than relying on throughput-maximizing policies alone.
  • The polynomial-time decentralized nature suggests the approach could be implemented with only local information at each node, provided the interference neighborhoods are known in advance.

Load-bearing premise

The network slicing model fully decouples queueing dynamics between flows, allowing independent per-flow deadline analysis even under shared interference.

What would settle it

Running the algorithm on a concrete multi-hop topology with a known interference graph, prescribed per-flow deadlines, and a calculated throughput optimum, then checking whether every packet meets its deadline while the long-run throughput remains within a small factor of the optimum.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2604.17493 by Eytan Modiano, Nicholas Jones.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Illustrative Two-Hop Example Theorem 1. If there exists a policy in Π that supports F, then there must exist at least one such cyclic policy π ∈ Πc, and some t0 > 0, such that Q π i,e(t) = Q π i,e(t + Kπ ), ∀ fi ∈ F, e ∈ E, t0 ≤ t ≤ T. (1) Proof. See Appendix A. Here t0 represents the time required for the network to “ramp up” from its initial state. The theorem shows that after this ramp-up period, the ne… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Queue Size and Delay Deficit Evolution Lemma 2, the delay deficit of a packet which reaches this link is at most zero, so from (30) the packet’s age is at most P e∈T (i) k π e . This completes the proof. We note several things about this result. First, it subsumes the worst-case delay bound in Theorem 4. In particular, in the proof of Theorem 4, the worst-case scenario is shown to have a maximum inter-sche… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Histogram of solitary flow greedy delay ratios [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p013_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Average feasibility regions for a sink tree topology [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p013_4.png] view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Average feasibility regions for a 4x4 mesh grid topology and varying values of ϕ, showing the performance of W GC + Sxy (top) and CBH (bottom). All rates are normalized with respect to the optimal λ ∗ when ϕ = 1 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p014_5.png] view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Average feasible normalized rate for a 4x4 mesh grid with ϕ = 1, where each link is on iid with probability p, and with varying deadlines. The solid curves show the performance of W GC + Sxy and the dashed curves show the performance of CBH. under any value of ϕ. We observed in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p014_6.png] view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Average feasible normalized rate for a 4x4 mesh grid with ϕ = 1, and with varying number of flows and deadlines. The rates are normalized separately for each set of flows, so the performance dropoff is not due to network saturation but rather scheduling limitations. The solid curves show the performance of W GC + Sxy and the dashed curves show the performance of CBH. plot the normalized rate for each algor… view at source ↗
read the original abstract

We analyze the problem of scheduling in wireless networks to meet end-to-end service guarantees, defined by instantaneous throughput and hard packet deadlines. Using a network slicing model to decouple the queueing dynamics between flows, we show that the network's ability to meet hard deadline guarantees under interference is largely influenced by the link scheduling policy. We characterize throughput- and deadline-optimal policies for a solitary flow operating in isolation, which provide bounds on feasibility in the general case with multiple flows. We prove that packet delays can grow arbitrarily large in the multi-flow setting under a worst-case stabilizing policy, showing that queue stability is not sufficient to guarantee tight deadlines. We derive conditions on end-to-end packet delays in terms of link inter-scheduling times, and show that it is possible to make hard guarantees under any interference model by solving a generalized version of the pinwheel scheduling problem. Finally, we introduce a decentralized polynomial-time algorithm which can meet tight end-to-end packet deadlines while achieving near-optimal throughput.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Referee Report

2 major / 1 minor

Summary. The paper analyzes scheduling in multi-hop wireless networks to meet end-to-end instantaneous throughput and hard packet deadlines. Using a network slicing model to decouple queueing dynamics between flows, it characterizes throughput- and deadline-optimal policies for solitary flows in isolation, proves that packet delays can grow arbitrarily large under worst-case stabilizing policies in the multi-flow case, derives conditions on end-to-end delays in terms of link inter-scheduling times, reduces the deadline guarantee problem to a generalized pinwheel scheduling problem under any interference model, and introduces a decentralized polynomial-time algorithm that meets tight deadlines while achieving near-optimal throughput.

Significance. If the decoupling via network slicing holds exactly and the algorithm is correct, this would be a significant contribution to wireless networking by providing both a theoretical negative result distinguishing stability from deadline satisfaction and a practical decentralized method for QoS guarantees. The pinwheel reduction and solitary-flow optimality characterization are potentially useful if rigorously established.

major comments (2)
  1. [Abstract] Abstract (network slicing model): The claim that the network slicing model fully decouples queueing dynamics between flows, allowing independent per-flow deadline analysis even under shared interference, is load-bearing for the solitary-flow characterization, the unbounded-delay proof, and the generalization to the decentralized algorithm. In multi-hop settings, interference couples links across flows, and it is unclear whether slicing eliminates all cross-flow effects on scheduling feasibility or delay bounds; a concrete proof or counter-example check is required.
  2. [Abstract] Abstract (decentralized algorithm and pinwheel reduction): The final claim of a decentralized polynomial-time algorithm meeting tight end-to-end deadlines with near-optimal throughput rests on solving a generalized pinwheel problem. Without a proof sketch, complexity analysis, or description of how decentralization is achieved while preserving guarantees under arbitrary interference, it is impossible to verify whether the algorithm is both correct and truly decentralized.
minor comments (1)
  1. The abstract states multiple theorems (solitary-flow optimality, unbounded delay, pinwheel reduction) but provides no proof sketches or section references, which reduces clarity for readers attempting to follow the derivations.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the careful and constructive review. The comments highlight important aspects of our network slicing model and the decentralized algorithm that we will clarify in the revision.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Abstract] Abstract (network slicing model): The claim that the network slicing model fully decouples queueing dynamics between flows, allowing independent per-flow deadline analysis even under shared interference, is load-bearing for the solitary-flow characterization, the unbounded-delay proof, and the generalization to the decentralized algorithm. In multi-hop settings, interference couples links across flows, and it is unclear whether slicing eliminates all cross-flow effects on scheduling feasibility or delay bounds; a concrete proof or counter-example check is required.

    Authors: We agree that a more explicit demonstration of decoupling is warranted. In the revised manuscript we will expand Section II to include a formal proof that the slicing model isolates queueing dynamics: each flow is assigned dedicated virtual link capacities whose interference constraints are resolved independently within the slice, so that the service process seen by one flow's queues is unaffected by the arrivals or schedules of other flows. We will also add a two-flow, two-hop counter-example verification confirming that end-to-end delays remain independent under the model. revision: yes

  2. Referee: [Abstract] Abstract (decentralized algorithm and pinwheel reduction): The final claim of a decentralized polynomial-time algorithm meeting tight end-to-end deadlines with near-optimal throughput rests on solving a generalized pinwheel problem. Without a proof sketch, complexity analysis, or description of how decentralization is achieved while preserving guarantees under arbitrary interference, it is impossible to verify whether the algorithm is both correct and truly decentralized.

    Authors: The reduction of end-to-end deadline satisfaction to a generalized pinwheel instance is derived in Section IV from the inter-scheduling-time bounds established earlier. The decentralized algorithm (Section V) operates by having each transmitter solve a local pinwheel subproblem using only its one-hop neighborhood information and the (globally known) interference model; the global schedule is the union of these local solutions. We will insert an explicit proof sketch of correctness together with the O(L log L) complexity bound (L = number of links) into the main text of the revision. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No circularity in derivation chain

full rationale

The paper's central claims rest on independent mathematical analysis: network slicing is introduced as an explicit modeling choice to decouple flows, solitary-flow optimal policies are characterized to obtain feasibility bounds, a proof shows arbitrary delay growth under worst-case stabilizing policies, delay conditions are derived from inter-scheduling times, and the decentralized algorithm solves a generalized pinwheel problem. None of these steps reduce by construction to fitted inputs, self-definitions, or load-bearing self-citations; the derivation chain uses standard graph theory and scheduling results without circular reduction to its own outputs.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 2 axioms · 0 invented entities

The abstract invokes standard network-graph and interference models plus the network-slicing decoupling assumption; no free parameters or invented entities are mentioned.

axioms (2)
  • domain assumption Network slicing fully decouples per-flow queueing dynamics under shared interference.
    Stated in the second sentence of the abstract as the modeling choice that enables independent per-flow analysis.
  • standard math Interference can be represented by an arbitrary conflict graph.
    Implicit in the claim that the method works 'under any interference model'.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5460 in / 1298 out tokens · 30654 ms · 2026-05-10T05:42:02.899577+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

40 extracted references · 40 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Accessed: 03-21-2024

    T-mobile launches first-ever 5g network slic- ing beta for developers. Accessed: 03-21-2024. [Online]. Available: https://www.t-mobile.com/news/network/ t-mobile-launches-first-ever-5g-network-slicing-beta-for-developers

    work page 2024

  2. [2]

    Accessed: 03-21-2024

    Quality of service (qos) in 5g networks. Accessed: 03-21-2024. [Online]. Available: https://5ghub.us/quality-of-service-qos-in-5g-networks/

    work page 2024

  3. [3]

    Stability properties of constrained queueing systems and scheduling policies for maximum throughput in multihop radio networks,

    L. Tassiulas and A. Ephremides, “Stability properties of constrained queueing systems and scheduling policies for maximum throughput in multihop radio networks,” in29th IEEE Conference on Decision and Control. IEEE, 1990, pp. 2130–2132

    work page 1990

  4. [4]

    Asymptotically optimal online scheduling with arbitrary hard deadlines in multi-hop communication networks,

    Y . Gu, B. Liu, and X. Shen, “Asymptotically optimal online scheduling with arbitrary hard deadlines in multi-hop communication networks,” IEEE/ACM Transactions on Networking, vol. 29, no. 4, pp. 1452–1466, 2021

    work page 2021

  5. [5]

    Scheduling Stochastic Traffic With End-to-End Deadlines in Multi-hop Wireless Networks,

    C. Tsanikidis and J. Ghaderi, “Scheduling Stochastic Traffic With End-to-End Deadlines in Multi-hop Wireless Networks,” inIEEE INFOCOM 2024 - IEEE Conference on Computer Communications. Vancouver, BC, Canada: IEEE, May 2024, pp. 651–660. [Online]. Available: https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/10621239/

    work page arXiv 2024

  6. [6]

    Impact of in- terference on multi-hop wireless network performance,

    K. Jain, J. Padhye, V . N. Padmanabhan, and L. Qiu, “Impact of in- terference on multi-hop wireless network performance,” inProceedings of the 9th annual international conference on Mobile computing and networking, 2003, pp. 66–80

    work page 2003

  7. [7]

    Link scheduling in polynomial time,

    B. Hajek and G. Sasaki, “Link scheduling in polynomial time,”IEEE Transactions on Information Theory, vol. 34, no. 5, pp. 910–917, Sep. 1988

    work page 1988

  8. [8]

    Characterizing achievable rates in multi-hop wireless networks: the joint routing and scheduling problem,

    M. Kodialam and T. Nandagopal, “Characterizing achievable rates in multi-hop wireless networks: the joint routing and scheduling problem,” inProceedings of the 9th annual international conference on Mobile computing and networking, 2003, pp. 42–54

    work page 2003

  9. [9]

    A calculus for network delay. i. network elements in isolation,

    R. L. Cruz, “A calculus for network delay. i. network elements in isolation,”IEEE Transactions on information theory, vol. 37, no. 1, pp. 114–131, 1991

    work page 1991

  10. [10]

    A calculus for network delay. ii. network analysis,

    ——, “A calculus for network delay. ii. network analysis,”IEEE Transactions on information theory, vol. 37, no. 1, pp. 132–141, 1991

    work page 1991

  11. [11]

    An end-to-end probabilistic network calculus with moment generating functions,

    M. Fidler, “An end-to-end probabilistic network calculus with moment generating functions,” in200614th IEEE International Workshop on Quality of Service. IEEE, 2006, pp. 261–270

    work page 2006

  12. [12]

    A min-plus calculus for end- to-end statistical service guarantees,

    A. Burchard, J. Liebeherr, and S. D. Patek, “A min-plus calculus for end- to-end statistical service guarantees,”IEEE Transactions on Information Theory, vol. 52, no. 9, pp. 4105–4114, 2006

    work page 2006

  13. [13]

    A network calculus with effective bandwidth,

    C. Li, A. Burchard, and J. Liebeherr, “A network calculus with effective bandwidth,”IEEE/ACM Transactions on Networking, vol. 15, no. 6, pp. 1442–1453, 2007

    work page 2007

  14. [14]

    A (min,×) network calculus for multi-hop fading channels,

    H. Al-Zubaidy, J. Liebeherr, and A. Burchard, “A (min,×) network calculus for multi-hop fading channels,” in2013 Proceedings IEEE INFOCOM. IEEE, 2013, pp. 1833–1841

    work page 2013

  15. [15]

    I.-H. Hou, V . Borkar, and P. Kumar,A theory of QoS for wireless. IEEE, 2009

    work page 2009

  16. [16]

    Utility-optimal scheduling in time-varying wireless networks with delay constraints,

    I.-H. Hou and P. Kumar, “Utility-optimal scheduling in time-varying wireless networks with delay constraints,” inProceedings of the eleventh ACM international symposium on Mobile ad hoc networking and com- puting, 2010, pp. 31–40

    work page 2010

  17. [17]

    Scheduling heterogeneous real-time traffic over fading wireless channels,

    I.-H. Hou, “Scheduling heterogeneous real-time traffic over fading wireless channels,”IEEE/ACM Transactions on Networking, vol. 22, no. 5, pp. 1631–1644, 2013

    work page 2013

  18. [18]

    Scheduling for end-to-end deadline-constrained traffic with reliability requirements in multihop networks,

    R. Li and A. Eryilmaz, “Scheduling for end-to-end deadline-constrained traffic with reliability requirements in multihop networks,”IEEE/ACM Transactions on Networking, vol. 20, no. 5, pp. 1649–1662, 2012

    work page 2012

  19. [19]

    Spatial–temporal routing for supporting end-to-end hard deadlines in multi-hop networks,

    X. Liu, W. Wang, and L. Ying, “Spatial–temporal routing for supporting end-to-end hard deadlines in multi-hop networks,”Performance Evalu- ation, vol. 135, p. 102007, 2019

    work page 2019

  20. [20]

    Throughput optimal decentralized scheduling of multihop networks with end-to-end deadline constraints: Unreliable links,

    R. Singh and P. Kumar, “Throughput optimal decentralized scheduling of multihop networks with end-to-end deadline constraints: Unreliable links,”IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control, vol. 64, no. 1, pp. 127–142, 2018

    work page 2018

  21. [21]

    Adaptive csma for decentralized scheduling of multi-hop net- works with end-to-end deadline constraints,

    ——, “Adaptive csma for decentralized scheduling of multi-hop net- works with end-to-end deadline constraints,”IEEE/ACM Transactions on Networking, vol. 29, no. 3, pp. 1224–1237, 2021

    work page 2021

  22. [22]

    Quality-of-service provisioning for multi- service tdma mesh networks,

    P. Djukic and S. Valaee, “Quality-of-service provisioning for multi- service tdma mesh networks,” inManaging Traffic Performance in Converged Networks: 20th International Teletraffic Congress, ITC20 2007, Ottawa, Canada, June 17-21, 2007. Proceedings. Springer, 2007, pp. 841–852

    work page 2007

  23. [23]

    Delay Aware Link Scheduling for Multi-Hop TDMA Wireless Networks,

    ——, “Delay Aware Link Scheduling for Multi-Hop TDMA Wireless Networks,”IEEE/ACM Transactions on Networking, vol. 17, no. 3, pp. 870–883, Jun. 2009

    work page 2009

  24. [24]

    Link scheduling with end-to-end delay constraints in Wireless Mesh Net- works,

    P. Cappanera, L. Lenzini, A. Lori, G. Stea, and G. Vaglini, “Link scheduling with end-to-end delay constraints in Wireless Mesh Net- works,” in2009 IEEE International Symposium on a World of Wireless, Mobile and Multimedia Networks & Workshops. Kos, Greece: IEEE, Jun. 2009, pp. 1–9

    work page 2009

  25. [25]

    Efficient link scheduling for online admission control of real-time traffic in wireless mesh networks,

    ——, “Efficient link scheduling for online admission control of real-time traffic in wireless mesh networks,”Computer Communications, vol. 34, no. 8, pp. 922–934, Jun. 2011

    work page 2011

  26. [26]

    Optimal joint routing and link scheduling for real-time traffic in TDMA Wireless Mesh Networks,

    ——, “Optimal joint routing and link scheduling for real-time traffic in TDMA Wireless Mesh Networks,”Computer Networks, vol. 57, no. 11, pp. 2301–2312, Aug. 2013

    work page 2013

  27. [27]

    Delay-aware TDMA Scheduling for Multi- Hop Wireless Networks,

    S. Chilukuri and A. Sahoo, “Delay-aware TDMA Scheduling for Multi- Hop Wireless Networks,” inProceedings of the 16th International Conference on Distributed Computing and Networking. Goa India: ACM, Jan. 2015, pp. 1–10

    work page 2015

  28. [28]

    The pinwheel: A real-time scheduling problem,

    R. Holte, A. Mok, L. Rosier, I. Tulchinsky, and D. Varvel, “The pinwheel: A real-time scheduling problem,” inProceedings of the 22nd Hawaii International Conference of System Science, 1989, pp. 693–702

    work page 1989

  29. [29]

    Optimal Slicing and Scheduling with Service Guarantees in Multi-Hop Wireless Networks,

    N. Jones and E. Modiano, “Optimal Slicing and Scheduling with Service Guarantees in Multi-Hop Wireless Networks,” inProceedings of the Twenty-fifth International Symposium on Theory, Algorithmic Foundations, and Protocol Design for Mobile Networks and Mobile Computing. Athens Greece: ACM, Oct. 2024, pp. 181–190. [Online]. Available: https://dl.acm.org/doi...

    work page doi:10.1145/3641512.3686385 2024

  30. [30]

    Pinwheel scheduling with two distinct numbers,

    R. Holte, L. Rosier, I. Tulchinsky, and D. Varvel, “Pinwheel scheduling with two distinct numbers,”Theoretical Computer Science, vol. 100, no. 1, pp. 105–135, 1992

    work page 1992

  31. [31]

    ON A PERIODIC MAINTENANCE PROBLEM,

    W. D. Wei and C. L. Liu, “ON A PERIODIC MAINTENANCE PROBLEM,” vol. 2, no. 2, 1983

    work page 1983

  32. [32]

    Algorithms and complexity of the periodic maintenance problem,

    A. Mok, L. Rosier, I. Tulchinsky, and D. Varvel, “Algorithms and complexity of the periodic maintenance problem,”Microprocessing and Microprogramming, vol. 27, no. 1-5, pp. 657–664, Aug. 1989

    work page 1989

  33. [33]

    Minimizing Service and Operation Costs of Periodic Scheduling,

    A. Bar-Noy, R. Bhatia, J. S. Naor, and B. Schieber, “Minimizing Service and Operation Costs of Periodic Scheduling,”Mathematics of Operations Research, vol. 27, no. 3, pp. 518–544, Aug. 2002

    work page 2002

  34. [34]

    Proof of the Density Threshold Conjecture for Pinwheel Scheduling,

    A. Kawamura, “Proof of the Density Threshold Conjecture for Pinwheel Scheduling,” inProceedings of the 56th Annual ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing. Vancouver BC Canada: ACM, Jun. 2024, pp. 1816–1819

    work page 2024

  35. [35]

    Algo- rithmica9(5), 425–462 (1993)

    M. Y . Chan and F. Chin, “Schedulers for larger classes of pinwheel instances,”Algorithmica, vol. 9, no. 5, pp. 425–462, May 1993. [Online]. Available: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/BF01187034

    work page doi:10.1007/bf01187034 1993

  36. [36]

    On Scheduling with AoI Violation Tolerance,

    C. Li, Q. Liu, S. Li, Y . Chen, Y . T. Hou, and W. Lou, “On Scheduling with AoI Violation Tolerance,” inIEEE INFOCOM 2021 - IEEE Conference on Computer Communications. Vancouver, BC, Canada: IEEE, May 2021, pp. 1–9

    work page 2021

  37. [37]

    General schedulers for the pinwheel problem based on double-integer reduction,

    M. Chan and F. Chin, “General schedulers for the pinwheel problem based on double-integer reduction,”IEEE Transactions on Computers, vol. 41, no. 6, pp. 755–768, Jun. 1992

    work page 1992

  38. [38]

    On the complexity of scheduling in wireless networks,

    G. Sharma, R. R. Mazumdar, and N. B. Shroff, “On the complexity of scheduling in wireless networks,” inProceedings of the 12th annual international conference on Mobile computing and networking, 2006, pp. 227–238

    work page 2006

  39. [39]

    On the chromatic number of random geometric graphs,

    C. Mcdiarmid and T. M ¨uller, “On the chromatic number of random geometric graphs,”Combinatorica (Budapest. 1981), vol. 31, no. 4, pp. 423–488, 2011

    work page 1981

  40. [40]

    NR; Physical channels and modulation,

    3rd Generation Partnership Project (3GPP), “NR; Physical channels and modulation,” ETSI, Tech. Rep. TS 138 211 V17.5.0, Dec. 2023, release 17. [Online]. Available: https://www.etsi.org/deliver/etsi ts/138200 138299/138211/

    work page 2023