Performance of Cooperative Spectrum-Sharing Systems with Amplify-and-Forward Relaying
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper investigates the performance of using cooperative relaying technique in spectrum-sharing cognitive radio (CR) systems while considering constraints on the average received-interference at the primary receivers. Specifically, we consider that the communication between a secondary source and its destination nodes is assisted by an intermediate relay that uses amplify-and-forward (AF) strategy. In this context, we obtain closed-form expressions for the probability density function (PDF) of the received signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) at the secondary destination node for different channel fading distributions, namely, Nakagami and Rayleigh. Then, the end-to-end performance of the proposed cooperative relaying spectrum-sharing system is investigated in terms of the overall achievable capacity and outage probability of the secondary user communication. Finally, simulation results sustaining our theoretical analysis are provided and comparisons illustrating the overall performance of the cooperative spectrum-sharing system are drawn for different propagation conditions.
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 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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 it