MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2050244778 · doi:10.1109/wcnc.2010.5506435

Channel Training and Estimation in Distributed Space-Time Coded Relay Networks with Multiple Transmit/Receive Antennas

2010· article· en· W2050244778 on OpenAlexaff
Sun Sun, Yindi Jing

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicCooperative Communication and Network Coding
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRelayTransmitterComputer scienceChannel (broadcasting)MIMORelay channelTraining (meteorology)Coding (social sciences)Topology (electrical circuits)Computer networkElectronic engineeringAlgorithmMathematicsEngineeringStatisticsElectrical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper investigates the channel training and estimation problems for distributed space-time coding (DSTC). To use DSTC in multi-antenna relay networks, the receiver needs to know the channels between the relays and the receiver (Relay-R channels) and also the equivalent channels between the transmitter and the receiver (Equ-T-R channels). By sending pilot signals from the relays, the training of the Relay-R channels is equivalent to that of a multi-input-multi-output (MIMO) system. The training of the Equ-T-R channels can be conducted directly using DSTC; but it requires a long training period. Thus, a separate-training method is proposed, in which an estimation on the Equ-T-R channels is obtained from estimations on the channels from the transmitter to the relays (T-Relay channels) and the Relay-R channels. The pilot code designs that minimize the trace of the error covariance matrix are investigated. The requirements on the training period are also derived, from which an adaptive training-period design is proposed. Simulation shows that in some networks, even with shorter training period, the separate-training scheme can achieve better performance than the direct-training scheme.

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)0.000
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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.878
Threshold uncertainty score0.472

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.240
Teacher spread0.219 · 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 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

Citations16
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicCooperative Communication and Network CodingFrench-language works237,207