MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1996784277 · doi:10.1109/ccece.2008.4564608

Two channel estimation methods for amplify-and-forward relay networks

2008· article· en· W1996784277 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.
venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.

Bibliographic record

VenueConference proceedings - Canadian Conference on Electrical and Computer Engineering · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicCooperative Communication and Network Coding
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRelayChannel (broadcasting)Quantization (signal processing)Computer scienceRelay channelEstimatorTerminal (telecommunication)AlgorithmTelecommunicationsMathematicsStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, we investigate the performance of amplify-and-forward relaying with two different pilot-symbol-assisted channel estimation methods. In the first estimation method, the cascaded channel consisting of source-to-relay and relay-to-destination links is estimated at the destination terminal. In the second estimation method, the estimation of cascaded channel is disintegrated into separate estimations of source-to-relay and relay-to-destination links which are carried out at the relay and destination terminals, respectively. The latter method involves feed-forwarding a quantized version of the source-to-relay channel estimate to the destination terminal. Our simulation results demonstrate that cascaded channel estimator outperforms its competitor with small number of quantization bits. As the number of employed quantization bits increase, disintegrated channel estimator approaches to its competitor eventually outperforming it.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.992
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.041
GPT teacher head0.280
Teacher spread0.240 · 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