MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2094513279 · doi:10.1109/ictta.2006.1684727

A Survey on Antenna Selection for MIMO Communication Systems

2006· article· en· W2094513279 on OpenAlexaff
Ali Ghrayeb

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced Wireless Communication Techniques
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAntenna (radio)Selection (genetic algorithm)FadingMIMOBlock codeComputer scienceChannel capacity3G MIMOAntenna diversityDiversity gainTelecommunicationsChannel (broadcasting)Electronic engineeringAlgorithmMathematicsDecoding methodsEngineeringArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper serves as a tutorial on antenna selection for multiple-input multiple-output (MIMO) communication systems. We consider the impact of antenna selection on the system capacity, as well as on the performance of the space-time trellis codes (STTCs) and space-time block codes (STBCs). We consider various fading channel models, including fast, block and slow fading. We also consider two selection criteria, namely, the one that maximizes the channel capacity and the one that maximizes the instantaneous received signal-to-noise ratio (SNR). We show that little capacity loss is incurred with antenna selection. We also demonstrate that the diversity order is maintained with antenna selection for STTCs only for special cases, whereas the diversity order is maintained with antenna selection for orthogonal STBCs for all channel models. This makes OSTBCs very attractive when antenna selection is considered. We finally consider the effect of some system nonidealities on the performance with antenna 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.

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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.003

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.263
Teacher spread0.241 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations38
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAdvanced Wireless Communication TechniquesFrench-language works237,207