Multicell Interference Mitigation with Joint Beamforming and Common Message Decoding
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Conventional wireless cellular systems treat out-of-cell interference as noise. This paper proposes methods and examines the benefit of designing decodable interference signals, whereby a transmitter may split its message into a common and a private part, and the common message may be decoded and subtracted by users in adjacent cells. This paper considers a downlink scenario, where the base-stations are equipped with multiple antennas, the mobile users are equipped with a single antenna, and multiple users are active simultaneously via spatial multiplexing. The network optimization problem consists of jointly determining the appropriate users in adjacent cells for rate splitting, the optimal transmit beamformers for common and private messages, and the optimal common-private rates to maximize the minimum achievable rate across the users. This paper shows that for fixed user selection and fixed common-private rate splitting, the optimization of transmit beamformers can be solved using a semidefinite programming (SDP) relaxation approach. Further, it is shown that for the case where the network consists of two message-splitting pairs, SDP relaxation is tight, i.e., beamforming is optimal. Finally, this paper proposes a heuristic user-selection and rate splitting strategy to characterize the performance improvement for cell-edge users due to common-message decoding.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".