Exact Error Analysis of Dual-Hop Fixed-Gain AF Relaying over Arbitrary Nakagami-m Fading
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Closed-form error analysis of dual-hop fixed-gain amplify-and-forward (AF) relaying systems for transmissions over Nakagami fading channels has, so far, been tractable only with integer fading parameters. For the general Nakagami-m fading with arbitrary m values, the exact closed-form error analysis is more challenging. This paper goes toward solving this problem by deriving a unified error analysis framework that embraces several general modulation schemes. The obtained Error Probability (EP) expressions involve common functions which can be efficiently evaluated using standard numerical softwares. This work represents a significant improvement on previous contributions, not only by unifying the error probability expressions pertaining to dual-hop fixed gain relaying over integer Nakagami-m fading, but also by extending them to the general arbitrary Nakagami-m fading. Simulation results sustaining our analysis are provided, and the impacts of various parameters on the overall AF relaying system performance are investigated.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".