Multi-antenna relay network beamforming design for multiuser peer-to-peer communications
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We consider a multi-user peer-to-peer relay network with multiple multi-antenna relays for amplify-and-forward relaying. Assuming distributed relay beamforming strategy, we investigate the design of each relay processing matrix to minimize the per-antenna relay power usage for given users' SNR targets. As the problem is NP-hard, we developed an approximate solution through the Lagrange dual domain. Through a sequence of transformations, we obtain a semi-closed form solution which can be determined by solving an efficient semi-definite programming problem. We also considered the semi-definite relaxation (SDR) approach. Compared with the SDR approach, the proposed solution has significantly lower computational complexity. The benefit of such solution is apparent when the optimal solution can be obtained by both approaches. When the solution is suboptimal, simulations show that the SDR approach has better performance. Thus, we proposed a combined method of the two approaches to trade-off performance and complexity. Simulations showed the effectiveness of such combined method.
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 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 | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".