MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2102854940 · doi:10.1109/glocom.2007.290

Performance Analysis of V-BLAST with Optimum Power Allocation

2007· article· en· W2102854940 on OpenAlexaff
Victoria Kostina, Sergey Loyka

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced Wireless Communication Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRobustness (evolution)Upper and lower boundsMathematical optimizationComputer scienceMonte Carlo methodAlgorithmBounded functionRange (aeronautics)FadingStatistical powerMathematicsStatisticsEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Comprehensive performance analysis of the unordered V-BLAST algorithm with various power allocation strategies is presented, which makes use of analytical tools and resorts to Monte-Carlo simulations for validation purposes only. High-SNR approximations for the optimized average block and total error rates are given. The SNR gain of optimization is rigorously defined and studied using analytical tools, including lower and upper bounds, high and low SNR approximations. The gain is upper bounded by the number of transmitters, for any modulation format and any type of fading This upper bound is achieved at high SNR by the considered optimization strategies. While the average optimization is less complex than the instantaneous one, its performance is almost as good at high SNR. A measure of robustness of the optimized algorithm is introduced and evaluated, including compact closed-form approximations. The optimized algorithm is shown to be robust to perturbations in individual and total transmit powers. Based on the algorithm robustness, a pre-set power allocation is suggested as a low-complexity alternative to the other optimization strategies, which exhibits only a minor loss in performance over the practical SNR range.

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)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.227
Teacher spread0.221 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAdvanced Wireless Communication Techniques→French-language works237,207→