Optimal Transmission Scheduling of Cooperative Communications with a Full-Duplex Relay
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
Most existing research studies in cooperative communication are based on a half-duplex assumption. Motivated by recent successes in hardware implementation of wireless full-duplex transmission, we propose a full-duplex cooperative communication (FDCC) approach to maximize the minimum transmission rate among a set of users to a common destination with the help of a dedicated relay. Under the consideration of hardware cost, only the relay node requires full-duplex wireless equipment in our design. We derive the achievable transmission rate for the proposed FDCC scheme under both amplify-and-forward (AF) and decode-and-forward (DF) modes. Further, as the transmission scheduling of users plays a critical role in determining the achievable transmission rate in FDCC, we formulate the max-min rate scheduling problem as a nonconvex mixed integer nonlinear programming (MINLP) problem. By applying linearization and convex approximation techniques, we propose an optimal algorithm based on a branch-and-bound framework to solve the problem efficiently. Extensive simulation results show that FDCC can significantly improve the transmission rate as compared with direct transmission and half-duplex cooperative communication (HDCC).
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 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 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