MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Multiple CFO Mitigation in Amplify-and-Forward Cooperative OFDM Transmission

2012· article· en· W2024982724 on OpenAlexaff
Yuzhe Yao, Xiaodai Dong

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Communications · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicCooperative Communication and Network Coding
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Victoria
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOrthogonal frequency-division multiplexingDecoding methodsComputer scienceCarrier frequency offsetInterference (communication)AlgorithmTransmission (telecommunications)MultiplexingDecodesElectronic engineeringTelecommunicationsChannel (broadcasting)EngineeringFrequency offset

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In cooperative orthogonal frequency division multiplexing (OFDM) systems, accurate frequency synchronization is critical to achieving any potential gains brought by the cooperative operation. The carrier frequency offsets (CFOs) present among multiple nodes (source, relays and destination) are more difficult to tackle than the single CFO problem in point-to-point systems. Multiple CFOs cause phase drift, inter-carrier interference (ICI) and inter-block interference (IBI) in the received signal. This paper deals with the CFO induced interference mitigation problem in distributed space time block coded (STBC) amplify-and-forward (AF) cooperative OFDM systems. We propose a two step approach to recover the phase distortion and suppress the ICI and IBI using low complexity methods to achieve high performance. The first step is time domain (TD) compensation and the second step is frequency domain (FD) decoding. Two TD compensation schemes are proposed, i.e., IBI-removal and ICI-removal. The IBI-removal scheme decouples the two blocks of one STBC codeword completely and then decodes the ICI degraded blocks individually. The ICI-removal scheme removes ICI first and the subsequent decoding requires joint decoding of the two blocks. Simulation results show that the IBI-removal scheme which is of lower complexity performs well with small CFO. For large CFO, the ICI-removal with modified iterative joint maximum likelihood decoding (MIJMLD) outperforms other schemes.

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)0.002
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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
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 head0.051
GPT teacher head0.303
Teacher spread0.252 · 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

Citations25
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on CommunicationsSame topicCooperative Communication and Network CodingFrench-language works237,207