MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2012897804 · doi:10.1109/isit.2007.4557084

On The Limitations of The Naive Lattice Decoding

2007· article· en· W2012897804 on OpenAlexaff
Mahmoud Taherzadeh, Amir K. Khandani

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicCooperative Communication and Network Coding
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDecoding methodsLattice (music)List decodingFadingMathematicsMIMOSequential decodingAlgorithmWord error rateFull RateUpper and lower boundsComputer scienceLattice reductionDiscrete mathematicsStatisticsBlock codeConcatenated error correction codeSpeech recognitionPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, the inherent drawbacks of the naive lattice decoding for MIMO fading systems is investigated. We show that using the naive lattice decoding for MIMO systems has considerable deficiencies in terms of the rate-diversity tradeoff. Unlike the case of maximum-likelihood decoding, in this case, even the perfect lattice space-time codes which have the non-vanishing determinant property can not achieve the optimal rate-diversity trade-off. Indeed, we show that in the case of naive lattice decoding, all the codes based on full-rate lattices have the same rate-diversity trade-off as V-BLAST. Also, we drive a lower bound on the symbol error probability of the naive lattice decoding for the fixed-rate MIMO systems (with equal numbers of receive and transmit antennas). This bound shows that asymptotically, the naive lattice decoding has an unbounded loss in terms of the required SNR, compared to the maximum likelihood decoding.

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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.940
Threshold uncertainty score0.207

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 head0.137
GPT teacher head0.306
Teacher spread0.169 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations9
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicCooperative Communication and Network CodingFrench-language works237,207