Cooperative diversity in the presence of impulsive noise
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
Although there already exists a rich literature on cooperative diversity, current results are mainly restricted to the conventional assumption of additive white Gaussian noise (AWGN). AWGN model realistically represents the thermal noise at the receiver, but ignores the impulsive nature of atmospheric noise, electromagnetic interference, or man-made noise which might be dominant in many practical applications. In this paper, we investigate the performance of cooperative communication over Rayleigh fading channels in the presence of impulsive noise modeled by Middleton Class A noise. Specifically, we consider a multi-relay network with amplify-and-forward relaying. Through the derivations of pairwise error probability, we quantify the diversity advantages. Based on the minimization of a union bound on the error rate performance, we formulate optimal power allocation schemes and demonstrate significant performance gains over their counterparts with equal power allocation. An extensive Monte Carlo simulation is also presented to illustrate the performance of cooperative schemes in various impulsive environments.
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 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 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