Cooperative Beamforming for Cognitive Radio Systems with Asynchronous Interference to Primary User
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
In a cognitive radio (CR) network when a group of CR users acts as relays for a given CR user, a cooperative beamforming can be used to improve the quality of communications. However, this cooperative beamforming can introduce asynchronous interference at the primary receiver due to different propagation delays between different CR relays and the primary receiver. In this paper, we propose an innovative beamforming method that maximizes the received signal power at the secondary destination while keeping the asynchronous interference at the primary receiver below a target threshold. The presented numerical results show that the proposed beamforming method can significantly reduce the interference at the primary receiver compared to the zero forcing beamforming as well as joint leakage suppression method and thereby decreases the outage probability. This beamforming method is further extended for the case when the channels between the primary receiver and the CR relays are not known perfectly. Moreover, in this paper, we propose and investigate two relay selection strategies in conjunction with cooperative beamforming. The presented numerical results show that the relay selection schemes in conjunction with the cooperative beamforming method can further improve the received signal power at the secondary destination.
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| 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 it