Joint Relay Selection and Power Allocation for Decode-and-Forward Cellular Relay Network with Channel Uncertainty
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this paper, we propose joint relay selection and power allocation algorithms that can work robustly under imperfect channel knowledge for a decode-and-forward (DF) cellular relay network. The objective is to minimize the uplink transmit power of the network taking each user's target data rate as the quality of service (QoS) constraint in the presence of imperfect channel state information (CSI). We consider the worst-case optimization approach, in which QoS constraint is satisfied for all users assuming both probabilistic and deterministic channel estimation error models. In this optimization framework, equivalent convex formulations are derived for the nonlinear optimization problems that are often combinatorially hard to solve in their original forms. After relay selection, efficient centralized as well as distributed power allocation algorithms scalable with respect to the size of the networks are developed. We also consider the case of power constrained networks where the objective is to provide QoS in the presence of limited power budgets on source and relays. The robust optimization problem is reformulated accordingly and efficient solution is provided. Numerical results show the effectiveness of the proposed algorithms and demonstrate the implications of ignoring channel estimation errors while developing relay selection and power allocation algorithms.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 |
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 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".