Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 major objections 5 minor 54 references

Radio Resource Management for V2V Multihop Communication Considering Adjacent Channel Interference

T0 review · 2 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-14 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read Joint multihop V2V scheduling and power control with adjacent-channel interference can be solved optimally as mixed Boolean linear programs.

desk verdict Useful paper, but the connectivity objective as written is mis-indexed and solves a different problem; fix is trivial but mandatory. read the letter →

arxiv 1908.06866 v1 pith:ZUEIX7GF submitted 2019-08-12 eess.SP cs.NI

Anver Hisham , Erik G. Ström , Fredrik Brännström This is my paper · ORCID
classification eess.SPcs.NI
keywords V2Vmulticastcommunicationmultihopschedulingpowercontroladjacentchannelinterferenceco-channelmixedBooleanlinearprogrammingageofinformationlatencyconstraints
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 claims that the hard radio-resource problem in vehicle-to-vehicle (V2V) multihop multicast—deciding who transmits when, on which frequency, and at what power, with both co-channel and adjacent-channel interference—can be recast as mixed Boolean linear programming for a whole family of objectives. Those objectives include total or worst-case throughput, connectivity, latency, and average age of information, each with a controllable probability of meeting a target. If this is right, then for any sufficiently small network a standard mixed-integer solver returns the provably optimal schedule and power allocation, giving a benchmark that heuristics can be measured against. The paper also supplies a clustering scheme to make the approach scale and a distributed, channel-free fallback for when no central scheduler has channel data.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing mechanism is the conversion of a mixed Boolean and continuous radio-resource problem into mixed Boolean linear programming. Its central object is the triplet of Boolean matrices $X$ (who transmits which message in which resource block), $Y$ (which links meet the SINR threshold), and $W$ (which messages are first received when), connected by linearized Boolean OR, AND, and min constraints, together with the continuous power matrix $P$ inside a linearized SINR inequality. A second piece is the end-to-end error-probability bound: choosing $\gamma_T$ so that $\epsilon(\gamma_T) \leq \epsilon_{\text{req}}/N_{\text{Tx}}$ guarantees any scheduled path's error probability stays below $\epsilon_{\text{req}}$, which lets probabilistic latency and age-of-information requirements be enforced by deterministic deadline and age constraints. The third piece is clustering: fixing a reuse distance from large-scale channel gains confines inter-cluster interference to $\delta\sigma^2$ and lets each group schedule independently, reducing the size of the exponential mixed-integer problem.

What would settle it

Take a small convoy, say $N=4$ vehicles, $T=3$ timeslots, and $F=2$ frequency slots, fix all parameters, and solve the mixed Boolean linear programming formulation for maximum connectivity; then exhaustively enumerate every feasible Boolean schedule and, for each, solve the linear power-control subproblem. If enumeration produces a larger objective value than the mixed-integer solution, the formulation is not exact. Separately, in simulation with random link errors, check whether the fraction of end-to-end latency or age-of-information violations exceeds the chosen probability requirement; if it does despite the stated threshold rule, the error-probability conversion is too optimistic.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central discovery is that multihop relaying can be folded into an exact optimization model without dropping adjacent-channel interference. The paper treats each possible transmission as a Boolean variable $X_{i,m,f,t}$, each potentially successful link as $Y_{i,j,f,t}$, and each first reception as $W_{j,m,t}$, and writes all physical and logical constraints—power limits, half-duplex, SINR thresholds, message generation, relaying, latency, and age of information—as linear equalities and inequalities over mixed Boolean and continuous variables. The SINR condition is linearized through $P_{i,f,t}H_{i,j} \geq \bar{\gamma}_T(\sigma^2 + \sum_{k,f'} P_{k,f',t} H_{k,j} \lambda_{|f'-f|}) - \zeta(1-Y_{i,j,f,t})$, with $\bar{\gamma}_T = \gamma_T/(1+\gamma_T)$ and $\lambda_0 = 1$ for co-channel interference. Probabilistic latency and age-of-information requirements are converted into deterministic constraints by raising the SINR threshold so the end-to-end error probability is bounded appropriately. In this model, the optimal schedule and power allocation for throughput, connectivity, latency, information age, or max-min fairness is a computable mixed Boolean linear program, not just an aspiration.

Load-bearing premise

The central controller must know, in advance and for the whole scheduling window, the average radio signal strength between every relevant pair of vehicles; if that information is stale or missing, the optimal schedules promised by the model cannot be realized in a real vehicle network.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • For any instance that fits the model, a solver returns a schedule and power allocation that is optimal among all multihop schedules under the chosen objective; no polynomial heuristic can beat it within the model.
  • Multihop relaying pays off: the simulations show joint multihop scheduling markedly improves average connectivity over the no-relay version, especially when there are more resource blocks than transmitters.
  • Probabilistic requirements on latency and age of information are guaranteed by construction once the SINR threshold is raised according to the end-to-end error bound, so the framework covers safety-message deadlines without needing retransmissions.
  • Clustering reduces the exponential complexity to per-group problems while bounding inter-cluster interference, and the distributed CDS algorithm removes the need for any channel knowledge while retaining multihop gains.
  • Worst-case (max-min) throughput and connectivity objectives sit in the same mixed Boolean linear programming framework, so fairness can be enforced exactly rather than by heuristic weighting.

Reading between the lines

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

  • A natural use of the formulation is as an exact benchmark oracle: for small networks, one could compare any fast heuristic's schedule against the optimum to measure suboptimality as a function of network size, timeslots, and frequency slots.
  • Because the framework only needs slowly varying average gains over a short scheduling horizon, a rolling-horizon implementation that re-estimates channel gains every scheduling interval is a direct extension, preserving optimality within each window.
  • The adjacent-channel interference model is parameterized by a generic mask $\lambda_r$, so replacing the standardized mask with a measured power-amplifier emission spectrum should require no reformulation—only a new table of $\lambda_r$ values.
  • The age-of-information probability guarantee uses a bound over the number of generated messages; empirical simulations may show the achieved violation probability is far below the target, meaning the SINR threshold could be relaxed in practice.
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

2 major / 5 minor

Summary. The manuscript studies joint scheduling and power control for V2V multicast with multihop relaying, incorporating both co-channel and adjacent-channel interference. It introduces binary scheduling variables X, link-success indicators Y, first-reception indicators W, and derives SINR constraints, latency variables, and age-of-information variables. The authors formulate several optimization problems as mixed Boolean linear programs: sum-throughput maximization, worst-case throughput, connectivity maximization, and connectivity under latency or AoI requirements. They also provide sufficient conditions that translate probabilistic latency/AoI constraints into deterministic ones via an end-to-end error-probability bound. For scalability, a clustering/grouping algorithm is proposed, along with a clustering-based distributed scheduler (CDS) that needs no channel state information. Simulations on a one-dimensional convoy topology compare the MBLP solutions (obtained with Gurobi) against the CDS heuristic and earlier scheduling schemes.

Significance. Modulo the issues below, the paper provides a valuable reference framework: the SINR transformation in Eq. (19) is coherent, the probabilistic latency/AoI arguments in Appendices B and C are genuine sufficient-condition derivations rather than fitted curves, and the clustering/CDS proposals are concrete answers to the scalability and no-CSI problems. If the connectivity formulation is repaired, the paper would supply a useful benchmark for V2V multihop multicast RRM with ACI. However, the connectivity objective as written does not maximize pairwise connectivity, and since the numerical section is built on that objective, the claimed benchmark-optimality of the connectivity results is not currently supported. The latency-constrained formulation also has an unresolved quantifier over messages. These are local, fixable issues, but they affect central claims.

major comments (2)
  1. [Section III-C3, Eqs. (34) and (35b)] The inner sum over j in R_i inside the definition of Z_{i,j} makes the right-hand side of (35b) independent of the destination j. As soon as any single receiver in R_i decodes any message from VUE i in any timeslot, the right-hand side is at least 1, so the constraint permits Z_{i,j}=1 for every j in R_i, even for receivers that never received a message. The objective (35a) then counts |R_i| connections whenever at least one link from i succeeds, so Problem (35) optimizes a per-source all-or-nothing objective rather than pairwise connectivity. This also invalidates the equivalence with the throughput problem (32) claimed in Section VII-B. The fix is to replace the inner sum over j with a sum over the specific receiver: Z_{i,j} <= sum_{m in M_i} sum_{t in S} W_{j,m,t} for each fixed j, in both (34) and (35b). Since the simulations in Section VII-B use this objective, the numerical results must be re-examined after the correction.
  2. [Section III-C5, Eq. (37b)] The constraint tau_{j,m} <= tau_T + zeta (1 - Z^tau_{i,j}) is written without a quantifier over the message index m. If |M_i| > 1, it is undefined whether a pair (i,j) is counted as satisfying the latency requirement only when every m in M_i meets the deadline, or when at least one m does. The objective (37a) maximizes over pairs, so the meaning changes depending on the intended quantifier. The formulation should specify the quantifier and, if the requirement applies to all messages, impose the constraint for each m in M_i; if it applies to at least one message, introduce an auxiliary binary variable per message to represent the OR condition. As written, Problem (37) is not well-posed for the general multi-message setting described in Section II.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Section III-A4, after Eq. (18)] The claim that zeta = gamma_bar (sigma^2 + N P^max) is sufficient assumes H_{k,j} <= 1 for all k,j and lambda_r <= 1 for all r; the manuscript should state this normalization explicitly or define zeta using max_{k,j} H_{k,j}.
  2. [Section III-A5, Eq. (22)] The phrase 'if and only if' is too strong: the constraint only enforces that a VUE cannot transmit a message it does not yet hold. A VUE that holds a message remains free not to transmit, which is consistent with the optimization but should be described as a necessary condition.
  3. [Section VII-A, RB-Group definition] The text says a VUE is allocated a contiguous RB-group of 10 RBs, giving F=5, whereas the system model in Section II assumes one message per RB; the relationship between RBs and RB-groups should be defined in Section II to avoid confusion.
  4. [Section VI, complexity expressions] The exponent notation in the complexity bounds is hard to parse; for example, the exponent 2^{|X|+|Y|+|W|} is rendered ambiguously as 2|X|+|Y|+|W| in places and should be typeset clearly.
  5. [Abstract and Section VII-B] There are several grammatical slips, including 'This paper investigate' in the abstract, 'probablistic' in Section III-B, and 'To the best of out knowledge' in Section VII-B.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 2.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the MBLP derivations are self-contained; the few self-citations are baselines or external lemmas, not fitted inputs.

full rationale

The paper's contribution is to encode V2V multihop scheduling and power control as MBLP problems. The constraints are built from the stated system model: (19) is the SINR constraint obtained by substituting the power/channel expressions (12)-(13) into the threshold condition (15); (21)-(22) define first-time reception and relaying eligibility recursively; (23)-(24) define latency and AoI; and the objectives (32)-(37) are linear in the Boolean variables. Nothing in these derivations fits a parameter to the reported performance curves and then renames the fit as a prediction. The parameters beta, delta, and gamma_T are set a priori from the 3GPP mask and channel model, not tuned to make the MBLP curves match. The comparison against the authors' earlier heuristic [14] is an external baseline, and the citation of [14] for the equal-power Pmax optimality claim (Section III-D) is a side remark for scheduling-only variants, not a load-bearing step of the central MBLP-optimality argument. Likewise, [35, Lemma 1] supplies a pre-existing threshold computation. I therefore find no circular reduction. One non-circular correctness issue should be flagged: in (34)-(35b), the inner sum over j in R_i makes the connectivity variable Z_i,j depend on whether any receiver in R_i succeeds rather than on the particular pair (i,j), so the stated pairwise-connectivity objective is not what the formulation maximizes. This is an indexing/formulation error, not a circular derivation, and it does not change the circularity score.

Assumptions & free parameters 3 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central claims rest on standard assumptions in the V2V communication literature: known large-scale CSI, independent errors, and the 3GPP ACIR mask. The hand-set parameters beta, delta, and gamma_T are design choices that affect the heuristics and results but are not fitted to make the predictions match.

free parameters (3)
  • beta = 0.1
    Per-vehicle penetration gain in the CDS interference model (58); set from 10 dB penetration loss per obstructing vehicle, not fitted to performance.
  • delta = 0.01
    Inter-cluster interference margin relative to noise (45), used in clustering reuse distance; chosen by hand, affects cluster size and thus the simulation results.
  • gamma_T = 7 dB
    SINR threshold for a successful link; set to support a 400-byte payload requirement, not fitted to the reported connectivity curves.
assumptions (4)
  • domain assumption Large-scale CSI H_{i,j} is known to the scheduler and fixed over the scheduling interval.
    Stated in Section II; all MBLP constraints (19) and the claimed optimality depend on this assumption.
  • domain assumption End-to-end hop errors are independent.
    Used in Appendix B and C to derive probabilistic latency and AoI guarantees; if errors are correlated, the guarantees may not hold.
  • domain assumption Message arrivals are deterministic and the indicator Omega_{i,m,t} is known.
    Assumed in Section III-A1; required for the MBLP formulation.
  • domain assumption The ACIR ratio lambda_r follows the 3GPP mask in (61).
    Input from standard; the simulation results depend on this interference model.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Radio Resource Management for V2V Multihop Communication Considering Adjacent Channel Interference." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/ZUEIX7GF

@misc{pith2026190806866,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Radio Resource Management for V2V Multihop Communication Considering Adjacent Channel Interference},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/ZUEIX7GF}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:1908.06866}
}
read the original abstract

This paper investigate joint scheduling and power control for V2V multicast allowing multihop communication. The effects of both co-channel interference and adjacent channel interference are considered. First, we solve the problem with the objective of maximizing the throughput and connectivity of vehicles in the network. Then extend the same problem formulation to include the objective of minimizing the latency and the average age of information (AoI), which is the age of the latest received message. In order to account for fairness, we also show the problem formulation to maximize the worst-case throughput and connectivity. All the problems are formulated as mixed Boolean linear programming problems, which allows computation of optimal solutions. Furthermore, we consider the error probability of a link failure in all the problem formulations and accommodate the probability requirements for satisfying a certain throughput/connectivity/latency/AoI. In order to support a large V2V network, a clustering algorithm is proposed whose computational complexity scale well with the network size. To handle the case of zero channel information at the scheduler, a multihop distributed scheduling scheme is proposed.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 1908.06866 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. System model We consider multicast communication, which includes unicast and broadcast as special cases. We define Ri ⊂ N as the set of intended receivers to VUE i. That is, VUE i wish to transmit its messages to the VUEs in Ri . Clearly, |Ri | = 1 and Ri = N \ {i} implies that VUE i use unicast communication and broadcast communication, respectively. In total, M messages are generated in the network dur￾ing the sch… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Received power (dBm) when an interferer is transmit [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. A. 1-Hop Feasibility Consider the link (i, j) between VUE i and VUE j. If the channel gain Hi,j is large enough to allow for direct (one-hop) communication with SNR greater or equal to γ T , then we say that the link (i, j) is 1-hop feasible. If the link is not 1-hop feasible, we must rely on multihop communication (relaying) to connect VUE i and j. Suppose VUE i is transmitting on RB (f, t). Then the SINR for the l… view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (3 more)
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Groups (c, g) and (c + 1, g) are separated by more than the reuse distance and can therefore reuse timeslots. Algorithm 1 Clustering Algorithm Input: {N, H, δ, σ2 , P max, N Tx} Output: C, G, T (c,g) , R(c,g) , Sg 1: Compute G using (46) and (47) 2: Compute C using (48…
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Average connectivity of a VUE for various algorithms [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_4.png]
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Fairness comparison of connectivity of a VUE ( [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_5.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

54 extracted references · 53 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    5G; Service requirements for enhanced V2X scenarios,

    3GPP, “5G; Service requirements for enhanced V2X scenarios,” 3rd Generation Partnership Project (3GPP), TR, Oct. 2018. [Online]. Available: http://www.3gpp.org/ftp/Specs/html-info/22186.htm

    work page 2018

  2. [2]

    Intelligent Transport Systems (ITS); Vehicular Communications; Basic Set of Applications; Part 3: Specifications of Decentralized Environmental Notification Basic Service,

    3GPP, “Intelligent Transport Systems (ITS); Vehicular Communications; Basic Set of Applications; Part 3: Specifications of Decentralized Environmental Notification Basic Service,” 3rd Generation Partnership Project (3GPP), TR 302.637, Apr. 2019. [Online]. Available: https://www.etsi.org/deliver/etsi_en/302600_302699/30263702/

    work page 2019

  3. [3]

    Reli- able ransmission of short packets through queues and noisy channels under latency and peak-age violation guarantees,

    R. Devassy, G. Durisi, G. C. Ferrante, O. Simeone, and E. Uysal, “Reli- able ransmission of short packets through queues and noisy channels under latency and peak-age violation guarantees,” IEEE Journal on Selected Areas in Communications , vol. 37, no. 4, pp. 721–734, Apr. 2019

    work page 2019

  4. [4]

    Minimizing age of infor- mation in vehicular networks,

    S. Kaul, M. Gruteser, V . Rai, and J. Kenney, “Minimizing age of infor- mation in vehicular networks,” in 2011 8th Annual IEEE Communica- tions Society Conference on Sensor, Mesh and Ad Hoc Communications and Networks, June 2011, pp. 350–358

    work page 2011

  5. [5]

    Mohammadi and F

    A. Mohammadi and F. M. Ghannouchi, RF Transceiver Design for MIMO Wireless Communications. Springer Berlin Heidelberg, 2012

    work page 2012

  6. [6]

    The linearity-efficiency compromise,

    P. M. Lavrador, T. R. Cunha, P. M. Cabral, and J. C. Pedro, “The linearity-efficiency compromise,” IEEE Microwave Magazine , vol. 11, no. 5, pp. 44–58, Aug 2010

    work page 2010

  7. [7]

    Linearized transmitters: an enabling technology for software defined radio,

    P. B. Kenington, “Linearized transmitters: an enabling technology for software defined radio,” IEEE Communications Magazine, vol. 40, no. 2, pp. 156–162, Feb 2002

    work page 2002

  8. [8]

    Iterative learning control for RF power amplifier linearization,

    J. Chani-Cahuana, P. N. Landin, C. Fager, and T. Eriksson, “Iterative learning control for RF power amplifier linearization,” IEEE Transac- tions on Microwave Theory and Techniques , vol. 64, no. 9, pp. 2778– 2789, Sept 2016

    work page 2016

Show all 54 references
  1. [9]

    Zaidi, F

    A. Zaidi, F. Athley, J. Medbo, U. Gustavsson, G. Durisi, and X. Chen, 5G Physical Layer: Principles, Models and Technology Components, 05 2018

    2018

  2. [10]

    A measurement based shadow fading model for vehicle-to-vehicle network simulations,

    T. Abbas, F. Tufvesson, K. Sjöberg, and J. Karedal, “A measurement based shadow fading model for vehicle-to-vehicle network simulations,” International Journal of Antennas and Propagation , 05 2015

    2015

  3. [11]

    Impact of a truck as an obstacle on vehicle-to-vehicle communications in rural and highway scenarios,

    D. Vlastaras, T. Abbas, M. Nilsson, R. Whiton, M. Olbäck, and F. Tufvesson, “Impact of a truck as an obstacle on vehicle-to-vehicle communications in rural and highway scenarios,” in Proc. IEEE 6th International Symposium on Wireless Vehicular Communications , Van- couver, Can...

    2014

  4. [12]

    Exper- imental study on the impact of vehicular obstructions in V ANETs,

    R. Meireles, M. Boban, P. Steenkiste, O. Tonguz, and J. Barros, “Exper- imental study on the impact of vehicular obstructions in V ANETs,” in 2010 IEEE Vehicular Networking Conference , Dec 2010, pp. 338–345

    2010

  5. [13]

    Vehicle-to-vehicle propagation models with large vehicle obstructions,

    R. He, A. F. Molisch, F. Tufvesson, Z. Zhong, B. Ai, and T. Zhang, “Vehicle-to-vehicle propagation models with large vehicle obstructions,” IEEE Transactions on Intelligent Transportation Systems, vol. 15, no. 5, pp. 2237–2248, Oct 2014

    2014

  6. [14]

    Scheduling and power control for V2V broadcast communications with co-channel and adjacent channel interference,

    A. Hisham, E. G. Ström, F. Brännström, and L. Yan, “Scheduling and power control for V2V broadcast communications with co-channel and adjacent channel interference,” IEEE Access, vol. 7, pp. 67 041–67 058, Jun. 2019

    2019

  7. [15]

    Joint Scheduling and Power Control for V2V Broadcast Communication with Adjacent Channel Interference,

    A. Hisham, D. Yuan, E. G. Ström, and F. Brännström, “Joint Scheduling and Power Control for V2V Broadcast Communication with Adjacent Channel Interference,” Apr. 2019. [Online]. Available: https://arxiv.org/abs/1904.06511

    2019 arXiv

  8. [16]

    Design aspects of network assisted device-to-device communications,

    G. Fodor, E. Dahlman, G. Mildh, S. Parkvall, N. Reider, G. Miklós, and Z. Turányi, “Design aspects of network assisted device-to-device communications,” IEEE Communications Magazine , vol. 50, no. 3, pp. 170–177, Mar. 2012

    2012

  9. [17]

    Analytical model and performance evaluation of long-term evolution for vehicle safety services,

    W. Li, X. Ma, J. Wu, K. S. Trivedi, X. L. Huang, and Q. Liu, “Analytical model and performance evaluation of long-term evolution for vehicle safety services,” IEEE Transactions on Vehicular Technology , vol. 66, no. 3, pp. 1926–1939, March 2017

    1926

  10. [18]

    Message scheduling and delivery with vehicular communication network infrastructure,

    J. Zhou, R. Q. Hu, and Y . Qian, “Message scheduling and delivery with vehicular communication network infrastructure,” in 2013 IEEE Global Communications Conference (GLOBECOM) , Atlanta, USA, Dec 2013, pp. 575–580

    2013

  11. [19]

    Channel prediction based scheduling for data dissemination in V ANETs,

    F. Zeng, R. Zhang, X. Cheng, and L. Yang, “Channel prediction based scheduling for data dissemination in V ANETs,” IEEE Communications Letters, vol. 21, no. 6, pp. 1409–1412, 2017

    2017

  12. [20]

    In-band emission in LTE-A D2D: Impact and ad- dressing schemes,

    D. Li and Y . Liu, “In-band emission in LTE-A D2D: Impact and ad- dressing schemes,” in 2015 IEEE 81st Vehicular Technology Conference (VTC Spring), May 2015

    2015

  13. [21]

    The impact of in-band emission interference in D2D-enabled cellular networks,

    H. Albasry, H. Zhu, and J. Wang, “The impact of in-band emission interference in D2D-enabled cellular networks,” in GLOBECOM 2017 - 2017 IEEE Global Communications Conference , Dec 2017

    2017

  14. [22]

    Embracing adjacent channel interference in next generation WiFi networks,

    L. Wang, X. Qi, and K. Wu, “Embracing adjacent channel interference in next generation WiFi networks,” in 2016 IEEE International Conference on Communications (ICC) , Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, May 2016

    2016

  15. [23]

    A multi- radio unification protocol for IEEE 802.11 wireless networks,

    A. Adya, P. Bahl, J. Padhye, A. Wolman, and L. Zhou, “A multi- radio unification protocol for IEEE 802.11 wireless networks,” in First International Conference on Broadband Networks , San Jose, CA, USA, Oct 2004, pp. 344–354

    2004

  16. [24]

    The impact of adjacent channel interference in multi-radio systems using IEEE 802.11,

    J. Nachtigall, A. Zubow, and J. P. Redlich, “The impact of adjacent channel interference in multi-radio systems using IEEE 802.11,” in 2008 International Wireless Communications and Mobile Computing Conference, Crete Island, Greece, Aug 2008, pp. 874–881

    2008

  17. [25]

    Understanding adjacent channel interference in multi-channel V ANETs,

    C. Campolo, A. Molinaro, and A. Vinel, “Understanding adjacent channel interference in multi-channel V ANETs,” in2014 IEEE Vehicular Networking Conference (VNC) , Dec 2014, pp. 101–104

    2014

  18. [26]

    On the impact of adjacent channel interference in multi-channel V ANETs,

    C. Campolo, C. Sommer, F. Dressler, and A. Molinaro, “On the impact of adjacent channel interference in multi-channel V ANETs,” in 2016 IEEE International Conference on Communications (ICC) , May 2016

    2016

  19. [27]

    Mul- tihop routing in hybrid vehicle-to-vehicle and vehicle-to-infrastructure networks,

    Y . Li, J. Luo, Z. Li, R. A. Stirling-Gallacher, W. Xu, and G. Caire, “Mul- tihop routing in hybrid vehicle-to-vehicle and vehicle-to-infrastructure networks,” in 2018 IEEE Globecom Workshops (GC Wkshps), Dec 2018, pp. 1–6

    2018

  20. [28]

    On the performance of uav-enabled multihop v2v fso systems over generalized α−µ channels,

    K. Dautov, S. Arzykulov, G. Nauryzbayev, and R. C. Kizilirmak, “On the performance of uav-enabled multihop v2v fso systems over generalized α−µ channels,” in 2018 International Conference on Computing and Network Communications (CoCoNet) , Aug 2018, pp. 69–73

    2018

  21. [29]

    Performance evaluation of priority vehicle in multi-hop wireless network,

    S. Tiwari and V . Bondre, “Performance evaluation of priority vehicle in multi-hop wireless network,” in 2017 International Conference on Innovations in Information, Embedded and Communication Systems (ICIIECS), March 2017, pp. 1–4

    2017

  22. [30]

    Analysis of multi-hop emergency message propagation in vehicular ad hoc networks,

    G. Resta, P. Santi, and J. Simon, “Analysis of multi-hop emergency message propagation in vehicular ad hoc networks,” in Proceedings of the 8th ACM International Symposium on Mobile Ad Hoc Networking and Computing, ser. MobiHoc ’07. New York, NY , USA: ACM, 2007, pp. 140–149. ...

    2007 doi

  23. [31]

    Scheduling algorithms for multihop radio networks,

    S. Ramanathan and E. L. Lloyd, “Scheduling algorithms for multihop radio networks,” IEEE/ACM Trans. Netw. , vol. 1, no. 2, pp. 166–177, Apr. 1993. [Online]. Available: http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/90.222924

    1993 doi

  24. [32]

    A model for the optimization of beacon message age-of-information in a vanet,

    A. Baiocchi and I. Turcanu, “A model for the optimization of beacon message age-of-information in a vanet,” in 2017 29th International Teletraffic Congress (ITC 29) , vol. 1, Sep. 2017, pp. 108–116

    2017

  25. [33]

    Joint Status Sampling and Updating for Minimizing Age of Information in the Internet of Things,

    B. Zhou and W. Saad, “Joint Status Sampling and Updating for Minimizing Age of Information in the Internet of Things,” Jul. 2018. [Online]. Available: https://arxiv.org/abs/1807.04356

    2018 arXiv

  26. [34]

    Average Peak Age-of- Information Minimization in UA V-assisted IoT Networks,

    M. A. Abd-Elmagid and H. S. Dhillon, “Average Peak Age-of- Information Minimization in UA V-assisted IoT Networks,” Apr. 2018. [Online]. Available: https://arxiv.org/abs/1804.06543

    2018 arXiv

  27. [35]

    Ra- dio resource management for D2D-based V2V communication,

    W. Sun, E. G. Ström, F. Brännström, K. C. Sou, and Y . Sui, “Ra- dio resource management for D2D-based V2V communication,” IEEE Transactions on Vehicular Technology , vol. 65, no. 8, pp. 6636–6650, Aug 2016

    2016

  28. [36]

    Dahlman, S

    E. Dahlman, S. Parkvall, and J. Sköld, 4G: LTE/LTE-Advanced for Mobile Broadband. Oxford: Academic Press, 2011

    2011

  29. [37]

    Interior-point methods,

    A. Florian, Potra, and J. W. Stephen, “Interior-point methods,” Journal of Computational and Applied Mathematics , vol. 124, no. 1, pp. 281– 302, Dec. 2000

    2000

  30. [38]

    Evolved Universal Terrestrial Radio Access (E-UTRA); Radio Frequency (RF) system scenarios,

    3GPP, “Evolved Universal Terrestrial Radio Access (E-UTRA); Radio Frequency (RF) system scenarios,” TR 36.942, Oct. 2014. [Online]. Available: http://www.3gpp.org/ftp/Specs/html-info/36942.htm

    2014

  31. [39]

    Temporal correlation of interference in vehicular networks with shifted-exponential time headways,

    K. Koufos and C. P. Dettmann, “Temporal correlation of interference in vehicular networks with shifted-exponential time headways,” IEEE Wireless Communications Letters, vol. 8, no. 1, pp. 189–192, Feb 2019

    2019

  32. [40]

    Analysis of vehicle headway distribution on multi-lane freeway considering car-truck interaction,

    D. Kong and X. Guo, “Analysis of vehicle headway distribution on multi-lane freeway considering car-truck interaction,” Advances in Mechanical Engineering , vol. 8, no. 4, 2016. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1177/1687814016646673 16

    2016 doi

  33. [41]

    Useful headway models,

    R. J. Cowan, “Useful headway models,” Transportation Research , vol. 9, no. 6, pp. 371 – 375, 1975. [Online]. Available: http: //www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/0041164775900088

    1975

  34. [42]

    Statistical analysis of vehicle time headways,

    R. T. Luttinen, “Statistical analysis of vehicle time headways,” Ph.D. dissertation, 1996. [Online]. Available: http://urn.fi/urn:nbn:fi: tkk-007970

    1996

  35. [43]

    Technical specification group radio access network; study on LTE-based V2X services,

    3GPP, “Technical specification group radio access network; study on LTE-based V2X services,” 3rd Generation Partnership Project (3GPP), TR 36.885, June 2016. [Online]. Available: http://www.3gpp.org/ftp/ Specs/html-info/36885.htm

    2016

  36. [44]

    Intelligent Transport Systems (ITS); LTE-V2X Access layer specification for Intelligent Transport Systems operating in the 5 GHz frequency band,

    ——, “Intelligent Transport Systems (ITS); LTE-V2X Access layer specification for Intelligent Transport Systems operating in the 5 GHz frequency band,” 3rd Generation Partnership Project (3GPP), TR 303.613, May 2019. [Online]. Available: https://www.etsi.org/deliver/ etsi_en/302...

    2019

  37. [45]

    LTE; Evolved Universal Terrestrial Radio Access (E-UTRA); Physical layer procedures,

    ——, “LTE; Evolved Universal Terrestrial Radio Access (E-UTRA); Physical layer procedures,” 3rd Generation Partnership Project (3GPP), TR 36.213, Mar. 2019. [Online]. Available: http://www.3gpp.org/ftp/ Specs/archive/36_series/36.213/

    2019

  38. [46]

    Path loss modeling for vehicle-to-vehicle communications,

    J. Karedal, N. Czink, A. Paier, F. Tufvesson, and A. Molisch, “Path loss modeling for vehicle-to-vehicle communications,”IEEE Transactions on Vehicular Technology, vol. 60, no. 1, pp. 323–328, Jan. 2011

    2011

  39. [47]

    Simulation and measurement-based vehicle-to-vehicle channel characterization: Accuracy and constraint analysis,

    T. Abbas, J. Nuckelt, T. Kürner, T. Zemen, C. F. Mecklenbräuker, and F. Tufvesson, “Simulation and measurement-based vehicle-to-vehicle channel characterization: Accuracy and constraint analysis,”IEEE Trans- actions on Antennas and Propagation , vol. 63, no. 7, pp. 3208–3218, ...

    2015

  40. [48]

    Highway and rural propagation channel modeling for vehicle-to-vehicle communications at 5.9 GHz,

    L. Cheng, B. E. Henty, F. Bai, and D. D. Stancil, “Highway and rural propagation channel modeling for vehicle-to-vehicle communications at 5.9 GHz,” in2008 IEEE Antennas and Propagation Society International Symposium, July 2008

    2008

  41. [49]

    Wideband car-to-car radio channel mea- surements and model at 5.9 GHz,

    J. Kunisch and J. Pamp, “Wideband car-to-car radio channel mea- surements and model at 5.9 GHz,” in Proceedings IEEE Vehicular Technology Conference, Sept 2008

    2008

  42. [50]

    A measurement-based multilink shadowing model for V2V network sim- ulations of highway scenarios,

    M. G. Nilsson, C. Gustafson, T. Abbas, and F. Tufvesson, “A measurement-based multilink shadowing model for V2V network sim- ulations of highway scenarios,” IEEE Transactions on Vehicular Tech- nology, vol. 66, no. 10, pp. 8632–8643, Oct 2017

    2017

  43. [51]

    A resource allocation scheme for D2D multicast with QoS protection in OFDMA-based sys- tems,

    B. Peng, C. Hu, T. Peng, Y . Yang, and W. Wang, “A resource allocation scheme for D2D multicast with QoS protection in OFDMA-based sys- tems,” in 2013 IEEE 24th Annual International Symposium on Personal, Indoor, and Mobile Radio Communications (PIMRC) , Sept 2013, pp. 2383–2387

    2013

  44. [52]

    Gurobi optimizer reference manual,

    Gurobi Optimization, Inc., “Gurobi optimizer reference manual,” 2015. [Online]. Available: http://www.gurobi.com

    2015

  45. [53]

    Ryan and S

    W. Ryan and S. Lin, Channel Codes: Classical and Modern. Cambridge University Press, 2009

    2009

  46. [54]

    Error-floors of ldpc codes,

    T. Richardson, “Error-floors of ldpc codes,” in Proceedings of the 41st Annual Conference on Communication, Control and Computing , 2003, pp. 1426–1435. 17

    2003

Pith tools

Reviewed August 14, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.