MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1980315494 · doi:10.1109/tvt.2012.2184311

Performance Analysis of Fixed Gain Relay Systems With a Single Interferer in Nakagami- $m$ Fading Channels

2012· article· en· W1980315494 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Vehicular Technology · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicCooperative Communication and Network Coding
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNakagami distributionFadingRelayInterference (communication)Bit error rateSignal-to-noise ratio (imaging)Outage probabilityCo-channel interferenceComputer scienceTopology (electrical circuits)Electronic engineeringMathematicsTelecommunicationsElectrical engineeringPhysicsEngineeringChannel (broadcasting)Power (physics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We investigate the outage probability and average bit error rate (BER) of a dual-hop fixed gain relaying system in the presence of interference and noise at the relay and destination. Our analysis assumes Nakagami-m fading for the source-relay, relay-destination, and interfering channels. We present new closed-form/series expressions for the outage probability, as well as the average BER. It is concluded that the presence of interference results in a floor point in both outage and BER performance. This floor point holds for signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) values higher than a certain threshold such that the larger the difference between the received powers of the useful and interfering signals, the higher the SNR value at which this floor point commences. Moreover, it is shown that the performance is practically not affected by the Nakagami-m shape parameter of the fading at the interfering link.

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.

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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.569
Threshold uncertainty score0.520

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.004
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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.244
Teacher spread0.217 · 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