MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2056314367 · doi:10.1145/1582379.1582646

Multiple-antenna multiple-relay system with precoding for multiuser transmission

2009· article· en· W2056314367 on OpenAlexaff
Arash Talebi, Witold A. Krzymień

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicCooperative Communication and Network Coding
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPrecodingComputer scienceBase stationMIMORelayComputer networkUpper and lower boundsSpectral efficiencyTransmission (telecommunications)Dirty paper codingLinear network codingSpatial multiplexingMultiplexingTransmitter power outputElectronic engineeringTopology (electrical circuits)TelecommunicationsPower (physics)Channel (broadcasting)MathematicsEngineeringElectrical engineeringTransmitterNetwork packet

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Multi-hop relaying will play a central role in next generation wireless systems. In this paper a novel relaying strategy that uses multiple-input multiple-output (MIMO) relays in a two-hop wireless network supporting multiuser transmission is proposed. The fixed relays linearly process the received signal, decode and forward it to multiple users. This relaying strategy employs MIMO spatial multiplexing to achieve high spectral efficiency and improve link capacity in cellular networks. In this paper the case when source (base station) and all the relays employ multiple antennas and each user has only one antenna is studied. New lower and upper bounds on the achievable sum rate for this architecture are derived. Zero-forcing dirty paper coding (ZF-DPC) at the base station is assumed and the direct link between the base station and users is neglected. We propose to jointly design precoding at the base station and linear processing at the relays to improve throughput subject to power constraints at the source and relay transmitters. The impact of multiple relaying on the achievable sum rate lower bound is investigated. The proposed lower bound improves on earlier sum rate lower bounds that were derived for simpler cases of relaying.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.263
Teacher spread0.227 · 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
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicCooperative Communication and Network Coding→French-language works237,207→