MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1965255283 · doi:10.1109/bsc.2010.5472969

SNR-based vs. BER-based power allocation for an amplify-and-forward single-relay wireless system with MRC at destination

2010· article· en· W1965255283 on OpenAlexaff
Hamed Rasouli, Alagan Anpalagan

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicCooperative Communication and Network Coding
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRelayComputer scienceWirelessTransmitter power outputPower (physics)Bit error rateSignal-to-noise ratio (imaging)Maximal-ratio combiningTerminal (telecommunication)Computer networkTelecommunicationsFadingTransmitterChannel (broadcasting)Physics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Optimum power allocation improves the efficiency of wireless systems. While optimizing the average received SNR would directly result in an optimized average BER in a non-relaying system, it is not clear whether we can achieve an optimized average BER in a relaying system by optimizing the average SNR at the destination terminal. In this paper, the problem of power allocation in a single-relay wireless system with maximal ratio combining (MRC) at the destination terminal is investigated via optimizing two different objective functions: average SNR and average BER. The average SNR and average BER expressions are derived for an amplify-and-forward relaying protocol with MRC at the destination as a function of source and relay transmit powers. Based on the derived SNR and BER expressions at the destination, closed-form expressions are derived for optimum transmit power of source and relay. It is observed that the BER-based power allocation scheme achieves considerable performance improvement over the SNR-based scheme when the relay is closer to the source than destination.

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)0.001
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.965
Threshold uncertainty score0.601

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 science0.0010.000
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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.260
Teacher spread0.230 · 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
GenreEmpirical

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

Quick stats

Citations13
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicCooperative Communication and Network CodingFrench-language works237,207