MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Decode-Compress-and-Forward with Selective-Cooperation for Relay Networks

2012· article· en· W2069794613 on OpenAlexaff
Javad Haghighat, Walaa Hamouda

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Communications Letters · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicCooperative Communication and Network Coding
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRelayComputer scienceBlock Error RateDecoding methodsTransmission (telecommunications)Relay channelCoding (social sciences)AlgorithmComputer networkReal-time computingTelecommunications linkTelecommunicationsMathematicsStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We propose a new signal-processing scheme, referred to as Decode-Compress-and-Forward with Selective-Cooperation (DCF-SC). In DCF-SC, the relay dedicates a certain amount of time to listen to the message broadcasted by the source and then performs Soft-Input Soft-Output (SISO) decoding. The relay then quantizes the Log-Likelihood Ratio (LLR) values received from the SISO decoder, encodes them and then transmits to the destination. The Selective-Cooperation condition determines whether the destination will accept or reject relay's collaboration. We consider half-duplex relaying with orthogonal channels at the destination and apply turbo coding at both source and relay nodes. We define a trade-off parameter that determines how much of the relay's time should be dedicated to listening and to transmission. We show by simulations that this trade-off factor has an optimal value for which the Block-Error Rate (BLER) is minimized. We compare the error rate performance of the proposed DCF-SC scheme with that of the Decode-Amplify-Forward (DAF) scheme presented in the literature.

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 score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
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 head0.038
GPT teacher head0.285
Teacher spread0.247 · 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 Communications LettersSame topicCooperative Communication and Network CodingFrench-language works237,207