MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2099615353 · doi:10.1109/icc.2006.255256

Uncoordinated Distributed Space-Time Trellis Coding

2006· article· en· W2099615353 on OpenAlexaff
Simon Yiu, Robert Schober, Lutz Lampe

Bibliographic record

Venue2006 IEEE International Conference on Communications · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicCooperative Communication and Network Coding
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRelayTrellis (graph)Computer scienceSpace–time codeSpace–time trellis codeNode (physics)Coding (social sciences)Block codeLinear network codingAlgorithmSpace–time block codeWirelessDecoding methodsTheoretical computer scienceTopology (electrical circuits)MathematicsComputer networkTelecommunicationsCombinatoricsEngineeringNetwork packetConcatenated error correction code

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, we introduce a new class of distributed space-time trellis codes (DSTTCs) for wireless networks with a large set of decode-and-forward relay nodes N. It is assumed that at any given time only a small, a priori unknown subset of nodes S - N is active. We consider the general case where each relay node is equipped with NT antennas and the destination node has NR antennas. In the novel distributed space-time trellis coding scheme each relay node is assigned a unique signature matrix but all active nodes use the same trellis for encoding. Efficient methods for the optimization of the set of signature matrices are provided and it is shown that existing full-rank STTCs designed for Nc - 2 co-located antennas are a favorable choice for the trelis encoding. If properly designed, the proposed DSTTCs achieve a diversity order of d = min{NcNR, NTNSNR} if NS nodes are active. Simulation results show the superior performance of the novel DSTTCs compared to distributed space-time filtering and distributed space-time block coding.

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 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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.980
Threshold uncertainty score0.989

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0050.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.081
GPT teacher head0.324
Teacher spread0.243 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations0
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venue2006 IEEE International Conference on CommunicationsSame topicCooperative Communication and Network CodingFrench-language works237,207