MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2024554252 · doi:10.1109/vetecs.2010.5493708

Improved Iterative Water-Filling with Rapid Convergence and Parallel Computation for Gaussian Multiple Access Channels

2010· article· en· W2024554252 on OpenAlexaff
Peter He, Lian Zhao, Alagan Anpalagan

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicError Correcting Code Techniques
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputationComputer scienceConvergence (economics)Iterative methodParallel computingGaussianAlgorithmComputational scienceMathematical optimizationMathematicsPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

For a class of the important problems that seek to maximize the sum rate of the multi-user multiple input multiple output multiple access channel (MIMO MAC) and compute the corresponding optimal input distribution, we developed a more efficient algorithm for solving this class of the problems compared with currently known algorithms. The performance result of this new algorithm indicates that the proposed algorithm overcomes some of the weaknesses of other algorithms. One of the key weaknesses that it overcomes is that the well-known iterative water-filling algorithms cannot utilize the machinery of parallel computation, owning to their inherent structure defects. Not only does the proposed algorithm sufficiently utilizes the machinery of parallel computation, it also shows faster convergence compared with previous research results. Numerical results show that the same properties of the proposed algorithm are also effective for finding the optimal input policy due to its simplicity and fast convergence.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.286
Teacher spread0.262 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations2
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicError Correcting Code TechniquesFrench-language works237,207