Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 5 minor 54 references

Energy Efficiency Maximization for CR-NOMA based Smart Grid Communication Network

T0 review · 4 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-16 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗ Review JSON

Pith's one-line read The paper claims that a zebra-optimization pairing and power allocation scheme maximizes energy efficiency in CR-NOMA smart-grid neighborhood networks, with simulated gains of 53.25% over unoptimized pairing at 15 dB SNR.

desk verdict The central EE gains are built on swapped NOMA SINR denominators, but the flaw is mechanical and the paper is a modest, fixable engineering application. read the letter →

arxiv 2505.02530 v1 pith:65Q2RMTR submitted 2025-05-05 eess.SP cs.ITcs.NImath.IT

Mubashar Sarfraz , Sheraz Alam , Sajjad A. Ghauri , Asad Mahmood This is my paper · ORCID
classification eess.SPcs.ITcs.NImath.IT
keywords smartgridcommunicationscognitiveradioNOMAenergyefficiencyuserpairingpowerallocationzebraoptimizationalgorithmneighborhoodareanetwork
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

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

The reading

This paper tries to establish that a joint user pairing and power allocation method, built on the zebra optimization algorithm, maximizes the energy efficiency of a cognitive-radio non-orthogonal multiple access (CR-NOMA) smart grid neighborhood area network. The authors cast the pairing-and-power problem as a single NP-hard, nonconvex optimization and then split it into two subproblems using block coordinate descent, solving each with the zebra heuristic. In Monte Carlo simulations they report that the joint method lifts efficiency by 53.25% over unoptimized pairing and 25.39% over pairing-only optimization at 15 dB signal-to-noise ratio, with comparable gains as SNR, path loss, user density, channel availability, and coverage radius vary. If this holds, smart meter data collection could use less energy and less spectrum while still meeting minimum rate requirements.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing machinery is block coordinate descent (BCD) applied to the mixed-integer nonlinear fractional objective (P1), splitting it into a channel and user-pairing subproblem (P1-A) and a power-allocation subproblem (P1-B). Each subproblem is solved by the zebra optimization algorithm (ZOA), a bio-inspired metaheuristic that updates candidate solutions through a foraging phase and a predator-defense phase, keeping the better of the initial and updated candidates. The pairing stage uses a beta-based power formula from the literature to set initial power coefficients, and the energy efficiency objective is evaluated as the sum of NOMA rates of each pair divided by the pair's power. This decomposition is what turns the intractable joint problem into a sequence of tractable, locally convergent updates.

What would settle it

Recompute the Monte Carlo runs with the weak-user rate written as log2(1 + δν p |gν|^2 / (δμ p |gν|^2 + $σ^{2}$)) instead of the interference-free form in Eq. (4), keeping the same random channel draws, and check whether ZOUPPA still beats UPWO and ZOUP by the reported percentages.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

On the paper's own terms, the central discovery is that optimizing the pairing before optimizing the power allocation, both through the zebra optimization algorithm, produces a near-optimal energy-efficient schedule for a CR-NOMA smart grid network. The paper states that the resulting ZOUPPA procedure achieves its largest reported gain at 15 dB SNR (53.25% over UPWO and 25.39% over ZOUP) and that this advantage persists across all parameter sweeps reported in Table III. It frames this as the first joint treatment of user pairing, power allocation, and channel allocation with CR-NOMA in the neighborhood-area-network layer of a smart grid.

Load-bearing premise

The efficiency result assumes that when the weaker user's signal is decoded, the stronger user's signal adds no interference, even though both signals occupy the same channel and the strong signal is still present.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Using ZOUPPA in a neighborhood area network would pair smart meters on the same channel and assign their transmit powers to deliver more data per unit energy than fixed power allocation, constant-beta power allocation, unoptimized pairing, adjacent pairing, or random pairing, under the simulated conditions.
  • Jointly optimizing pairing and power adds roughly 13% to 52% to efficiency over pairing-only optimization across the parameter sweeps, so power allocation is a substantial part of the gain and not an afterthought.
  • The reported advantage persists across suburban to dense-urban path-loss exponents, SNR from 10 to 40 dB, 100 to 300 smart meters, 60 to 120 channels, and coverage radii of 100 to 500 m, suggesting the heuristic is not tuned to one operating point.
  • The stated convergence rule (stop when the change in energy efficiency drops below a small threshold) gives an implementable online stopping criterion for a data collector that re-runs the algorithm when the channel database updates.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • An editorial next step would be to benchmark ZOUPPA against an exact or convexified fractional-programming solver on the same instances; the paper compares only against heuristics, so the remaining optimality gap is unknown.
  • The objective enters the algorithm only through the fitness function, so the same BCD-plus-ZOA structure could be reused for other NAN goals such as latency, fairness, or throughput without changing the pairing or power-update rules.
  • Because the channel list is assumed fixed for at least 48 hours, a natural extension is to re-run ZOUPPA at each channel-database update and quantify how much efficiency is lost if the pairing is frozen in between.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

4 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper considers an uplink CR-NOMA system for a smart-grid neighborhood area network in which smart meters transmit to a data collector. It formulates a joint user pairing, channel assignment, and power allocation problem to maximize energy efficiency, decomposes it via block coordinate descent into pairing and power-allocation subproblems, and solves each subproblem with the zebra optimization algorithm. The claimed contribution is a heuristic (ZOUPPA) that, according to Monte Carlo simulations, improves energy efficiency by 53.25% over UPWO and 25.39% over ZOUP at 15 dB SNR, with similar gains across SNR, path loss, user density, channel availability, and coverage radius.

Significance. If the reported results were valid, the proposed heuristic would be a practically relevant contribution to resource allocation in smart-grid NANs, combining CR spectrum access with NOMA user pairing and power control. The paper covers an extensive parameter sweep and compares with several benchmarks. However, the current manuscript contains two load-bearing quantitative errors: the NOMA rate expressions are inconsistent with the stated SIC order, and the improvement percentages in Table III are computed with the wrong denominator. In addition, the NP-hardness and convergence claims are asserted rather than proved, and no code or data are provided. These issues prevent the central claim from being accepted at face value.

major comments (4)
  1. [Section II-A, Eqs. (4)-(5) and objective (6)] The rate expressions do not match the stated successive interference cancellation order. The text states that the DC decodes the weak user ν first and then the strong user μ; under that order, the weak user's decoded signal suffers interference from the strong user, so Eq. (4) should contain δμ p |gν|^2 in the denominator, and after cancellation the strong user's Eq. (5) should have no δν term. As written, Eq. (4) omits the strong-user interference and Eq. (5) includes a term that the stated SIC order would have removed. Because the objective in (6) and the QoS constraint C1 in (7b) depend directly on these rates, every reported EE value and percentage improvement in Section IV is computed under an optimistic and internally inconsistent model. The authors should correct the rate model and rerun the simulations.
  2. [Section IV-B, Table III] The percentage improvements are not consistent with the reported EE values. For the 15 dB SNR row, the table lists % improvement to UPWO = 53.25% and to ZOUP = 25.39%; these are obtained as (ZOUPPA−UPWO)/ZOUPPA and (ZOUPPA−ZOUP)/ZOUPPA, respectively, not as (ZOUPPA−benchmark)/benchmark. Using the standard convention, the correct values for that row would be 113.9% vs UPWO and 34.0% vs ZOUP. The same pattern appears in every row of Table III. Since the abstract and conclusion quote these percentages, the headline quantitative claims are not supported by the table. The authors should either recompute the percentages with the benchmark as denominator or explicitly define the different convention, and then update the abstract and conclusion.
  3. [Section III-C, Convergence Analysis] The statement 'F(Si+1) ≥ F(Si)' and the convergence criterion are asserted without proof. ZOA is a stochastic metaheuristic that uses random foraging and defense updates, and the BCD decomposition solves each subproblem heuristically, so monotonic improvement of the objective is not guaranteed. The cited reference [52] does not establish convergence for this algorithm. Either provide a proof under the specific update rules and penalty/feasibility handling, or reword the section to describe empirical convergence and remove the claim that ZOUPPA converges when changes in the energy efficiency metric fall below a threshold in the sense of a rigorous optimization guarantee.
  4. [Section II-B and Section III] The claim that (P1) is NP-hard is made without a proof or a reference. Because the paper proposes a heuristic, this claim is not central to the algorithmic contribution, but if it is kept it should be justified by a reduction from a known NP-hard problem, or it should be replaced by a statement about computational intractability due to the mixed-integer structure.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Abstract and Section IV-B] The abstract quotes 53.2% and 25.4% at 15 dB, while Table III gives 53.25% and 25.39%; the values should be consistent after the percentage calculation is corrected.
  2. [Section IV-A] The user-pairing improvement percentages, such as the '9.5% improvement in UPWO' at 40 dB, are reported without stating the denominator used; the same denominator ambiguity as in Table III may affect these numbers, and they should be verified.
  3. [Section II-A, Eq. (9)] The power allocation coefficients δu and δv are not clearly defined; δu is expressed as a sum involving both gu and gv, and then δv = 1 − δu, which makes it unclear which term corresponds to which user. Please define the notation and state the feasible range of δu and δv explicitly.
  4. [Throughout] There are numerous typographical errors and inconsistent notations, e.g., 'sub-probelm', 'V arying', 'channle', 'MA X', 'δu and δv' versus 'δµ and δν', and the use of 'bpj/Hz' as the EE unit. A careful proofreading pass is needed.
  5. [Section IV] No simulation code, data, or error bars are provided, which makes it impossible to assess the statistical significance of the reported average EE gains; please consider making the code available or at least reporting confidence intervals.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the EE objective, constraints, and simulation comparisons are computed from explicitly stated Shannon-rate expressions and external algorithms, with no fitted parameter or self-citation chain forcing the reported gains.

full rationale

The paper's derivation chain is self-contained: the system model defines user rates via Eqs. (4) and (5), the EE objective via Eq. (6), and the optimization problem via constraints C1-C5. The BCD decomposition into P1-A and P1-B uses the same objective, and the ZOA heuristic from Ref. [53] optimizes that stated objective. Power allocation in P1-A is initialized using the external QoS-based formula of Ref. [50], not from the paper's own results. The reported EE values and percentage improvements in Table III and Section IV are outputs of Monte Carlo simulations under these stated equations and benchmark definitions; they are not fed back as fitted parameters or as inputs to the claimed predictions. The self-citations present, e.g., Refs. [44]-[46] and [51] for cognitive-radio smart-grid channel-availability assumptions, supply modeling context rather than a load-bearing uniqueness theorem or fitted quantity. The UPWO benchmark is described by an independent channel-grouping rule and cited to Ref. [54]; its definition does not presuppose the proposed algorithm's superiority. The questionable omission of the strong-user interference term in Eq. (4) is a modeling/correctness concern that would change numerical rates, but it is not a circular step: the rate expression is an input assumption, not a result reduced to its own output. Therefore, no step in the claimed derivation is equivalent to its inputs by construction.

Assumptions & free parameters 5 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central claim depends on the channel model, the SIC decoding order, the asserted NP-hardness and convergence of ZOA, and hand-chosen algorithm constants. No new physical entities are introduced. The free parameters are conventional simulation choices, but their values affect the reported improvements.

free parameters (5)
  • Power allocation constants beta1, beta2 = Swept in [0,1] with beta1 + beta2 = 1
    The reported ZOUP performance depends on the chosen beta2 value, and higher beta2 yields higher EE. These are hand-chosen constants, not fitted to external data.
  • ZOA population size (candidate solutions) = 20
    The number of candidate solutions is set to 20 in Table II and directly affects search quality and reported EE.
  • ZOA maximum iterations = 100
    The stopping criterion is set to 100 iterations; more iterations could change the results.
  • ZOA defense constant R = 0.1
    R is selected in the defense strategy update and influences candidate movement.
  • ZOA exploration constant omega = Range [1,2]
    The omega constant controls the foraging update and is chosen by hand.
assumptions (5)
  • domain assumption The TV white space channel list remains unchanged for at least 48 hours after announcement (open-loop regulatory paradigm, IEEE 802.11af).
    Invoked in Section II to justify channel availability being fixed during assignment; if channels change faster, the pairing and power solution may be invalid.
  • domain assumption Channels experience Rayleigh fading and suburban path loss with exponent chi, in a slow varying environment.
    Section II.A states this channel model; all simulation results depend on it, and it may not generalize despite the path loss sweeps.
  • domain assumption The DC decodes the weak user's signal first with perfect SIC, then the strong user.
    Section II.A establishes the SIC order used in Equations (4) and (5); the associated weak-user rate formula omits interference, so the assumption is implemented optimistically.
  • ad hoc to paper The joint problem P1 is NP-hard.
    Asserted in Section III without proof; it motivates the BCD decomposition but is not established formally.
  • ad hoc to paper The iterative process converges when changes in energy efficiency fall below epsilon, with F(S_{i+1}) >= F(S_i).
    Section III.C asserts convergence by analogy with BCD [52], but ZOA is a stochastic metaheuristic and no convergence proof is given.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Energy Efficiency Maximization for CR-NOMA based Smart Grid Communication Network." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/65Q2RMTR

@misc{pith2026250502530,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Energy Efficiency Maximization for CR-NOMA based Smart Grid Communication Network},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/65Q2RMTR}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2505.02530}
}
read the original abstract

Managing massive data flows effectively and resolving spectrum shortages are two challenges that Smart Grid Communication Networks (SGCN) must overcome. To address these problems, we provide a combined optimization approach that makes use of Cognitive Radio (CR) and Non-Orthogonal Multiple Access (NOMA) technologies. Our work focuses on using user pairing (UP) and power allocation (PA) techniques to maximize energy efficiency (EE) in SGCN, particularly within Neighbourhood Area Networks (NANs). We develop a joint optimization problem that takes into account the real-world limitations of a CR-NOMA setting. This problem is NP-hard, nonlinear, and nonconvex by nature. To address the computational complexity of the problem, we use the Block Coordinate Descent (BCD) method, which breaks the problem into UP and PA subproblems. Initially, we proposed the Zebra-Optimization User Pairing (ZOUP) algorithm to tackle the UP problem, which outperforms both Orthogonal Multiple Access (OMA) and non-optimized NOMA (UPWO) by 78.8\% and 13.6\%, respectively, at a SNR of 15 dB. Based on the ZOUP pairs, we subsequently proposed the PA approach, i.e., ZOUPPA, which significantly outperforms UPWO and ZOUP by 53.2\% and 25.4\%, respectively, at an SNR of 15 dB. A detailed analysis of key parameters, including varying SNRs, power allocation constants, path loss exponents, user density, channel availability, and coverage radius, underscores the superiority of our approach. By facilitating the effective use of communication resources in SGCN, our research opens the door to more intelligent and energy-efficient grid systems. Our work tackles important issues in SGCN and lays the groundwork for future developments in smart grid communication technologies by combining modern optimization approaches with CR-NOMA.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2505.02530 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Layered SGCN architecture A. Related work This section discusses the existing literature utilizing NOMA to improve EE and the integration of CR with the SGCNs to meet spectrum demands. For SGCN, a CR is proposed to place a power price on the efficiently received traffic data in a meter management system to collect data [25]. A wideband hybrid access strategy is proposed and analyzed to share the spectrum between SG … view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. NOMA-based communication model for NAN sce [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Performance comparison between different user pair [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (6 more)
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Impact of various environments. random pairing, and 86.71% for OMA with 60 users. The adjacent pairing starts losing performance compared to the random pairing, and the performance of OMA starts vanishing when SMs exceed 60. Similarly, the ZOUP achieves an 8% improveme…
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Performance comparison between different user pair [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_4.png]
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Performance comparison for increasing SMs. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_6.png]
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Impact of an increasing coverage region. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_8.png]
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Performance comparison for increasing the channel [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_7.png]
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: Impact of an increasing SNR for a joint optimization [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_9.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

54 extracted references · 53 canonical work pages

  1. [52]

    Joint computation and communication resource optim ization for beyond diagonal UA V -IRS empowered MEC networks,

    A. Mahmood, T. X. Vu, W. U. Khan, S. Chatzinotas, and B. Ot ter- sten, “Joint computation and communication resource optim ization for beyond diagonal UA V -IRS empowered MEC networks,” arXiv preprint arXiv:2311.07199, 2023

    arXiv 2023

  2. [1]

    Resid ential energy consumption scheduling: A coupled-constraint game approach,

    R. Deng, Z. Y ang, J. Chen, N. R. Asr, and M.-Y . Chow, “Resid ential energy consumption scheduling: A coupled-constraint game approach,” IEEE Transactions on Smart Grid , vol. 5, no. 3, pp. 1340–1350, 2014

    work page 2014

  3. [2]

    Multi-contingency cascading analysis of smart grid based on self-organizing map,

    J. Y an, Y . Zhu, H. He, and Y . Sun, “Multi-contingency cascading analysis of smart grid based on self-organizing map,” IEEE Transactions on Information F orensics and Security, vol. 8, no. 4, pp. 646–656, 2013

    work page 2013

  4. [3]

    S. S. Refaat, O. Ellabban, S. Bayhan, H. Abu-Rub, F. Blaab jerg, and M. M. Begovic, Smart Grid and Enabling Technologies . John Wiley & Sons, 2021

    work page 2021

  5. [4]

    Risk assessment of cascading outages: Methodologies and challe nges,

    V aiman, Chen, Chowdhury, Dobson, Hines, Papic, and Zhan g, “Risk assessment of cascading outages: Methodologies and challe nges,” IEEE Transactions on Power Systems , vol. 27, no. 2, pp. 631–641, 2011

    work page 2011

  6. [5]

    An online learning a lgorithm for demand response in smart grid,

    S. Bahrami, V . W. Wong, and J. Huang, “An online learning a lgorithm for demand response in smart grid,” IEEE Transactions on Smart Grid , vol. 9, no. 5, pp. 4712–4725, 2017

    work page 2017

  7. [6]

    A wireless metering and monit oring system for solar string inverters,

    E. Kabalci and Y . Kabalci, “A wireless metering and monit oring system for solar string inverters,” International Journal of Electrical Power & Energy Systems, vol. 96, pp. 282–295, 2018

    work page 2018

  8. [7]

    Smart gr id mechanism for green energy management: a comprehensive rev iew,

    A. Fakhar, A. M. Haidar, M. Abdullah, and N. Das, “Smart gr id mechanism for green energy management: a comprehensive rev iew,” International Journal of Green Energy , vol. 20, no. 3, pp. 284–308, 2023

    work page 2023

Show all 54 references
  1. [8]

    Integrating renewable energy resources in to the smart grid: Recent developments in information and communicatio n technolo- gies,

    M. H. Rehmani, M. Reisslein, A. Rachedi, M. Erol-Kantarc i, and M. Radenkovic, “Integrating renewable energy resources in to the smart grid: Recent developments in information and communicatio n technolo- gies,” IEEE Transactions on Industrial Informatics , vol. 14, no. 7, pp....

    2018

  2. [9]

    Demand side managem ent in microgrid: A critical review of key issues and recent trends ,

    D. Kanakadhurga and N. Prabaharan, “Demand side managem ent in microgrid: A critical review of key issues and recent trends ,” Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews , vol. 156, p. 111915, 2022

    2022

  3. [10]

    A novel mu ltitype- users welfare equilibrium based real-time pricing in smart grid,

    J. Lin, B. Xiao, H. Zhang, X. Y ang, and P . Zhao, “A novel mu ltitype- users welfare equilibrium based real-time pricing in smart grid,” Future Generation Computer Systems , vol. 108, pp. 145–160, 2020

    2020

  4. [11]

    Control and estimation techniques applied to smart microgrids: A review,

    N. T. Mbungu, A. A. Ismail, M. AlShabi, R. C. Bansal, A. El nady, and A. K. Hamid, “Control and estimation techniques applied to smart microgrids: A review,” Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews , p. 113251, 2023

    2023

  5. [12]

    A lightweight message authentication scheme for smart grid c ommunica- tions,

    M. M. Fouda, Z. M. Fadlullah, N. Kato, R. Lu, and X. S. Shen , “A lightweight message authentication scheme for smart grid c ommunica- tions,” IEEE Transactions on Smart grid , vol. 2, no. 4, pp. 675–685, 2011

    2011

  6. [13]

    Wireless big data computing in smart grid,

    K. Wang, Y . Wang, X. Hu, Y . Sun, D.-J. Deng, A. Vinel, and Y . Zhang, “Wireless big data computing in smart grid,” IEEE Wireless Communi- cations, vol. 24, no. 2, pp. 58–64, 2017. 11

    2017

  7. [14]

    Big Data management in smart grid: concepts, requirements and imple mentation,

    H. Daki, A. El Hannani, A. Aqqal, A. Haidine, and A. Dahbi , “Big Data management in smart grid: concepts, requirements and imple mentation,” Journal of Big Data , vol. 4, no. 1, pp. 1–19, 2017

    2017

  8. [15]

    Big data issues in sm art grid– A review,

    C. Tu, X. He, Z. Shuai, and F. Jiang, “Big data issues in sm art grid– A review,” Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews , vol. 79, pp. 1099–1107, 2017

    2017

  9. [16]

    Smart grid big data analytics: survey of techno logies, techniques, and applications,

    D. Syed, A. Zainab, A. Ghrayeb, S. S. Refaat, H. Abu-Rub, and O. Bouhali, “Smart grid big data analytics: survey of techno logies, techniques, and applications,” IEEE Access , vol. 9, pp. 59 564–59 585, 2020

    2020

  10. [17]

    Smart grid c ommu- nication: Its challenges and opportunities,

    R. Ma, H.-H. Chen, Y .-R. Huang, and W. Meng, “Smart grid c ommu- nication: Its challenges and opportunities,” IEEE transactions on Smart Grid, vol. 4, no. 1, pp. 36–46, 2013

    2013

  11. [18]

    Software defined communication framework for smar t grid to meet energy demands in smart cities,

    M. Faheem, M. Umar, R. A. Butt, B. Raza, M. A. Ngadi, and V . C. Gungor, “Software defined communication framework for smar t grid to meet energy demands in smart cities,” in 2019 7th International Istanbul smart grids and cities congress and fair (ICSG) . IEEE, 2019, pp. 51– 55

    2019

  12. [19]

    Trust system design optim ization in smart grid network infrastructure,

    Y . Zhang, L. Wang, and W. Sun, “Trust system design optim ization in smart grid network infrastructure,” IEEE Transactions on Smart Grid , vol. 4, no. 1, pp. 184–195, 2013

    2013

  13. [20]

    Cognitive radi o for smart grid communications,

    A. Ghassemi, S. Bavarian, and L. Lampe, “Cognitive radi o for smart grid communications,” in 2010 First IEEE International Conference on Smart Grid Communications . IEEE, 2010, pp. 297–302

    2010

  14. [21]

    SDN-enabled multi-attribute-based secure communicatio n for smart grid in IIoT environment,

    R. Chaudhary, G. S. Aujla, S. Garg, N. Kumar, and J. J. Rod rigues, “SDN-enabled multi-attribute-based secure communicatio n for smart grid in IIoT environment,” IEEE Transactions on Industrial Informatics , vol. 14, no. 6, pp. 2629–2640, 2018

    2018

  15. [22]

    Communi cation network requirements for major smart grid applications in H AN, NAN and W AN,

    M. Kuzlu, M. Pipattanasomporn, and S. Rahman, “Communi cation network requirements for major smart grid applications in H AN, NAN and W AN,” Computer Networks , vol. 67, pp. 74–88, 2014

    2014

  16. [23]

    Cognitive r adio for smart grids: Survey of architectures, spectrum sensing mec hanisms, and networking protocols,

    A. A. Khan, M. H. Rehmani, and M. Reisslein, “Cognitive r adio for smart grids: Survey of architectures, spectrum sensing mec hanisms, and networking protocols,” IEEE Communications Surveys & Tutorials , vol. 18, no. 1, pp. 860–898, 2015

    2015

  17. [24]

    Energy-efficient no n-orthogonal multiple access for UA V communication system,

    M. F. Sohail, C. Y . Leow, and S. Won, “Energy-efficient no n-orthogonal multiple access for UA V communication system,” IEEE Transactions on V ehicular Technology, vol. 68, no. 11, pp. 10 834–10 845, 2019

    2019

  18. [25]

    Optimisation of sensing tim e and transmis- sion time in cognitive radio-based smart grid networks,

    C. Y ang, Y . Fu, and J. Y ang, “Optimisation of sensing tim e and transmis- sion time in cognitive radio-based smart grid networks,” International Journal of Electronics , vol. 103, no. 7, pp. 1098–1111, 2016

    2016

  19. [26]

    Priority-based traffic scheduling and utility optimization for cognitive radio co mmunication infrastructure-based smart grid,

    J. Huang, H. Wang, Y . Qian, and C. Wang, “Priority-based traffic scheduling and utility optimization for cognitive radio co mmunication infrastructure-based smart grid,” IEEE Transactions on Smart Grid , vol. 4, no. 1, pp. 78–86, 2013

    2013

  20. [27]

    QoS diffe rential scheduling in cognitive-radio-based smart grid networks: An adaptive dynamic programming approach,

    R. Y u, W. Zhong, S. Xie, Y . Zhang, and Y . Zhang, “QoS diffe rential scheduling in cognitive-radio-based smart grid networks: An adaptive dynamic programming approach,” IEEE transactions on neural networks and learning systems , vol. 27, no. 2, pp. 435–443, 2015

    2015

  21. [28]

    Two- stage non-orthogonal multiple access over power line commu nication channels,

    K. M. Rabie, B. Adebisi, A. M. Tonello, S. Y arkan, and M. I jaz, “Two- stage non-orthogonal multiple access over power line commu nication channels,” IEEE Access , vol. 6, pp. 17 368–17 376, 2018

    2018

  22. [29]

    A comparison between orthogonal and non-orthogonal multi ple access in cooperative relaying power line communication systems,

    K. M. Rabie, B. Adebisi, E. H. Y ousif, H. Gacanin, and A. M . Tonello, “A comparison between orthogonal and non-orthogonal multi ple access in cooperative relaying power line communication systems, ” IEEE access, vol. 5, pp. 10 118–10 129, 2017

    2017

  23. [30]

    A Cat Swarm Optimiza tion based transmission power minimization for an aerial NOMA communi cation system,

    M. F. Sohail, C. Y . Leow, and S. Won, “A Cat Swarm Optimiza tion based transmission power minimization for an aerial NOMA communi cation system,” V ehicular Communications, vol. 33, p. 100426, 2022

    2022

  24. [31]

    Optimizing weighted-sum energy efficiency in downlink and uplink NOMA systems,

    M. R. Zamani, M. Eslami, M. Khorramizadeh, H. Zamani, an d Z. Ding, “Optimizing weighted-sum energy efficiency in downlink and uplink NOMA systems,” IEEE Transactions on V ehicular Technology, vol. 69, no. 10, pp. 11 112–11 127, 2020

    2020

  25. [32]

    EE optimizati on for downlink NOMA-based multi-tier CRANs,

    Z. Q. Al-Abbasi, K. M. Rabie, and D. K. So, “EE optimizati on for downlink NOMA-based multi-tier CRANs,” IEEE Transactions on V ehicular Technology, vol. 70, no. 6, pp. 5880–5891, 2021

    2021

  26. [33]

    Energy-efficient pow er alloca- tion for IoT devices in CR-NOMA networks,

    G. Wu, W. Zheng, Y . Li, and M. Zhou, “Energy-efficient pow er alloca- tion for IoT devices in CR-NOMA networks,” China Communications, vol. 18, no. 4, pp. 166–181, 2021

    2021

  27. [34]

    Energy effic ient transmission in underlay CR-NOMA networks enabled by reinf orcement learning,

    W. Liang, S. X. Ng, J. Shi, L. Li, and D. Wang, “Energy effic ient transmission in underlay CR-NOMA networks enabled by reinf orcement learning,” China Communications, vol. 17, no. 12, pp. 66–79, 2020

    2020

  28. [35]

    Energy efficiency maximizat ion for two- way relay assisted CR-NOMA system based on SWIPT,

    W. Zhao, R. She, and H. Bao, “Energy efficiency maximizat ion for two- way relay assisted CR-NOMA system based on SWIPT,” IEEE Access , vol. 7, pp. 72 062–72 071, 2019

    2019

  29. [36]

    NOMA- based energy-efficient task scheduling in vehicular edge co mputing networks: A self-imitation learning-based approach,

    P . Dong, Z. Ning, R. Ma, X. Wang, X. Hu, and B. Hu, “NOMA- based energy-efficient task scheduling in vehicular edge co mputing networks: A self-imitation learning-based approach,” China Communi- cations, vol. 17, no. 11, pp. 1–11, 2020

    2020

  30. [37]

    Po wer- efficient communication in UA V -aided wireless sensor netwo rks,

    M. Hua, Y . Wang, Z. Zhang, C. Li, Y . Huang, and L. Y ang, “Po wer- efficient communication in UA V -aided wireless sensor netwo rks,” IEEE Communications Letters , vol. 22, no. 6, pp. 1264–1267, 2018

    2018

  31. [38]

    Energy-efficient optimal power a llocation for swipt based iot-enabled smart meter,

    Z. Masood and Y . Choi, “Energy-efficient optimal power a llocation for swipt based iot-enabled smart meter,” Sensors, vol. 21, no. 23, p. 7857, 2021

    2021

  32. [39]

    Chan nel access and power control for energy-efficient delay-aware heterog eneous cel- lular networks for smart grid communications using deep rei nforcement learning,

    F. A. Asuhaimi, S. Bu, P . V . Klaine, and M. A. Imran, “Chan nel access and power control for energy-efficient delay-aware heterog eneous cel- lular networks for smart grid communications using deep rei nforcement learning,” IEEE Access , vol. 7, pp. 133 474–133 484, 2019

    2019

  33. [40]

    Secrecy- energy efficient hybrid beamforming for satellite-terrest rial integrated networks,

    Z. Lin, M. Lin, B. Champagne, W.-P . Zhu, and N. Al-Dhahir , “Secrecy- energy efficient hybrid beamforming for satellite-terrest rial integrated networks,” IEEE Transactions on Communications , vol. 69, no. 9, pp. 6345–6360, 2021

    2021

  34. [41]

    Supporting IoT with rate-splitting multiple access in sat ellite and aerial- integrated networks,

    Z. Lin, M. Lin, T. De Cola, J.-B. Wang, W.-P . Zhu, and J. Ch eng, “Supporting IoT with rate-splitting multiple access in sat ellite and aerial- integrated networks,” IEEE Internet of Things Journal , vol. 8, no. 14, pp. 11 123–11 134, 2021

    2021

  35. [42]

    Refracting RIS-aided hybrid satellite-terrestria l relay networks: Joint beamforming design and optimization,

    Z. Lin, H. Niu, K. An, Y . Wang, G. Zheng, S. Chatzinotas, a nd Y . Hu, “Refracting RIS-aided hybrid satellite-terrestria l relay networks: Joint beamforming design and optimization,” IEEE Transactions on Aerospace and Electronic Systems , vol. 58, no. 4, pp. 3717–3724, 2022

    2022

  36. [43]

    Exploiting Multi-Layer Refracting RIS-Assist ed Receiver for HAP-SWIPT Networks,

    K. An, Y . Sun, Z. Lin, Y . Zhu, W. Ni, N. Al-Dhahir, K.-K. Wo ng, and D. Niyato, “Exploiting Multi-Layer Refracting RIS-Assist ed Receiver for HAP-SWIPT Networks,” IEEE Transactions on Wireless Communi- cations, 2024

    2024

  37. [44]

    Clustering-based channel allocation scheme for neighbor hood area network in a cognitive radio based smart grid communication ,

    S. Alam, A. N. Malik, I. M. Qureshi, S. A. Ghauri, and M. Sa rfraz, “Clustering-based channel allocation scheme for neighbor hood area network in a cognitive radio based smart grid communication ,” IEEE Access, vol. 6, pp. 25 773–25 784, 2018

    2018

  38. [45]

    Dynamic resource allocation for cognitive radio based smart grid co mmunication networks,

    S. Alam, M. Sarfraz, M. Usman, M. Ahmad, and S. Iftikhar, “Dynamic resource allocation for cognitive radio based smart grid co mmunication networks,” Int. J. Adv. Appl. Sci. , vol. 4, no. 10, pp. 76–83, 2017

    2017

  39. [46]

    Joint power and channel allocation scheme for IEEE 802.11 af based smart grid communication network,

    S. Alam, N. Aqdas, I. M. Qureshi, S. A. Ghauri, and M. Sarf raz, “Joint power and channel allocation scheme for IEEE 802.11 af based smart grid communication network,” Future Generation Computer Systems , vol. 95, pp. 694–712, 2019

    2019

  40. [47]

    Power-domain NOMA for massive connectivity in smart grid communication networks,

    M. Jayachandran and C. Kalaiarasy, “Power-domain NOMA for massive connectivity in smart grid communication networks,” in Proceedings of International Conference on Power Electronics and Renewab le Energy Systems: ICPERES 2021 . Springer, 2022, pp. 205–212

    2021

  41. [48]

    Performance of orthogonal b eamforming with NOMA for smart grid communication in the presence of imp ulsive noise,

    M. Hussain and H. Rasheed, “Performance of orthogonal b eamforming with NOMA for smart grid communication in the presence of imp ulsive noise,” Arabian Journal for Science and Engineering , vol. 45, no. 8, pp. 6331–6345, 2020

    2020

  42. [49]

    A multi-channel distributed routing scheme f or smart grid real-time critical event monitoring applications in t he perspective of Industry 4.0,

    M. Faheem, R. A. Butt, B. Raza, M. W. Ashraf, M. A. Ngadi, a nd V . C. Gungor, “A multi-channel distributed routing scheme f or smart grid real-time critical event monitoring applications in t he perspective of Industry 4.0,” International Journal of Ad Hoc and Ubiquitous Comp...

    2019

  43. [50]

    A general pow er allocation scheme to guarantee quality of service in downlink and uplin k NOMA systems,

    Z. Y ang, Z. Ding, P . Fan, and N. Al-Dhahir, “A general pow er allocation scheme to guarantee quality of service in downlink and uplin k NOMA systems,” IEEE transactions on wireless communications , vol. 15, no. 11, pp. 7244–7257, 2016

    2016

  44. [51]

    Cognitive radio based smart grid communication network,

    S. Alam, M. F. Sohail, S. A. Ghauri, I. Qureshi, and N. Aqd as, “Cognitive radio based smart grid communication network,” Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews , vol. 72, pp. 535–548, 2017

    2017

  45. [53]

    Zebra o ptimization algorithm: A new bio-inspired optimization algorithm for s olving op- timization algorithm,

    E. Trojovsk´ a, M. Dehghani, and P . Trojovsk` y, “Zebra o ptimization algorithm: A new bio-inspired optimization algorithm for s olving op- timization algorithm,” IEEE Access , vol. 10, pp. 49 445–49 473, 2022

    2022

  46. [54]

    Capacity optimiz ation of next-generation UA V communication involving non-orthogonal multiple access,

    M. Sarfraz, M. F. Sohail, S. Alam, M. Javvad ur Rehman, S. A. Ghauri, K. Rabie, H. Abbas, and S. Ansari, “Capacity optimiz ation of next-generation UA V communication involving non-orthogonal multiple access,” Drones, vol. 6, no. 9, p. 234, 2022

    2022

Pith tools

Reviewed August 16, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.