MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2095699525 · doi:10.1109/twc.2008.061041

Diversity order analysis of the decode-and-forward cooperative networks with relay selection

2008· article· en· W2095699525 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Wireless Communications · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicCooperative Communication and Network Coding
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRelayUpper and lower boundsSelection (genetic algorithm)Cooperative diversityMaximal-ratio combiningOverhead (engineering)Computer scienceBounded functionDiversity combiningBit error rateOrder (exchange)TelecommunicationsMathematicsAlgorithmMathematical optimizationDecoding methodsPower (physics)FadingArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, we focus on the diversity order of the decode-and-forward (DF) cooperative networks with relay selection. Many detection schemes have been proposed for the DF; but it has been shown that the cooperative maximum ratio combining (C-MRC) can achieve almost the same performance as the optimum maximum likelihood detector and has a much lower complexity. Therefore, we first combine the C-MRC with the relay selection and show that it achieves the full diversity order by deriving an upper bound of its average bit error rate (BER). In order to reduce the signaling overhead, we then combine the link-adaptive regeneration (LAR) with the relay selection. By deriving an upper bound of the average BER, we show that, when there are two relays, the diversity order of the LAR with relay selection is upper-bounded by three and lower-bounded by 3 - epsiv, where xi is an arbitrarily small positive number.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
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 score0.859
Threshold uncertainty score0.997

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.004
Science and technology studies0.0040.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0020.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.257
Teacher spread0.223 · 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