Generalized Framework for the Level Crossing Analysis of Ordered Random Processes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper investigates the following general problem relating to ordered random processes: givennindependent but not necessarily identical random processes, how frequently, on average, does any given process become one of thepth (p=1,2,...,n-1) largest processes? This is a fundamental problem arising in the design and analysis of contemporary multidimensional wireless communication systems (e.g., multiantenna, multiuser) employing opportunistic selection. We formulate this problem as one involving the level crossing rate (LCR) of a carefully defined ordered random process across the zero threshold, which we solve by developing a new mathematical framework based on the theory of permanents. For the case where the processes correspond to time-varying Rayleigh fading channels, we present exact closed-form formulas for the LCR, simplified tight upper bounds, as well as asymptotic results fornandpapproaching infinity but with fixed ratio. These results reveal interesting fundamental limits for the LCR, and are shown to given meaningful insight even for small values ofnandp. We further use our mathematical framework to characterize the required per-branch and overall switching rate of a generalized selection combining diversity receiver, allowing for different average powers for each branch. With the aid of majorization theory, we demonstrate that the overall switching rate is maximized when the power delay profile is uniform.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.015 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.001 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".