Dual-hop AF systems with maximum end-to-end SNR relay selection over nakagami-m and rician fading links
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Novel, exact closed-form expressions are derived for the probability density function (PDF) and the cumulative distribution function (CDF) of the instantaneous end-to-end signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) of opportunistic dual-hop amplify-and-forward relaying systems with maximum end-to-end SNR relay selection. The derived expressions are used to find exact integral solutions for the ergodic capacity and the average symbol error probability as well as an exact explicit closed-form solution for the outage probability of the opportunistic AF system. The analysis is presented for the common channel fading distributions, Nakagami-m and Rician fadings, and for the cases of statistically identical fading links and statistically non-identical fading links. Examples show precise agreement between analytical results and simulation results. It is shown that the system performance is superior to AF relaying systems without relay selection. The maximum end-to-end SNR relay selection method provides diversity gain, proportional to the relay selection pool size, over AF relaying systems without relay selection.
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.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 it