MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1574268339 · doi:10.1109/vetecf.2004.1400309

Capacity-optimal structured linear dispersion codes for correlated MIMO channels

2005· article· en· W1574268339 on OpenAlexaff
A.M. Sayeed, J.H. Kotecha, Zhihong Hong

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced Wireless Communication Techniques
Canadian institutionsCommunications Research Centre Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPairwise error probabilityMIMOCovariance matrixMathematicsAlgorithmChannel capacityDiagonalFadingMatrix (chemical analysis)Topology (electrical circuits)Channel (broadcasting)CovarianceGenerator matrixComputer scienceDecoding methodsTelecommunicationsCombinatoricsStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, our analysis is based on a unitarily equivalent eigen-domain representation of correlated MIMO fading channels. The eigen-domain channel matrix has statistically independent entries and the non-uniform powers of its entries capture the channel correlation structure. Capacity and pairwise error probability (PEP) analysis is greatly simplified in the eigen-domain. In particular, the capacity-achieving input covariance matrix is diagonal in the eigen-domain, and the PEP bounds reveal the interaction between the code and the channel in spatio-temporal signal space dimensions. Furthermore, the achievable spatial multiplexing gain and diversity are constrained by the number of dominant channel entries in the eigen-domain. Using insights from the capacity and PEP analysis, we propose a characterization of capacity-optimal linear dispersion codes via a family of structured code generator matrices. These are parameterized by three unitary matrices, that determine the space-time structure of the codes, and a diagonal power-shaping matrix. The role of these matrices in controlling code performance is discussed and illustrative numerical results are presented.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.609
Threshold uncertainty score0.542

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.016
GPT teacher head0.252
Teacher spread0.236 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations8
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAdvanced Wireless Communication TechniquesFrench-language works237,207