Communications over the Best Singular Mode of a Reciprocal MIMO Channel
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We consider two nodes equipped with multiple antennas that intend to communicate i.e. both of which transmit and receive data. We model the responses of the communication channels between these nodes as linear and reciprocal (time invariant or with very slow time variations). In practice, we exploit the closed loop conversation between these nodes and present an efficient algorithm allowing to adaptively identify the Best Singular Mode (BSM) of the channel. We consider two scenarios. In the first scenario, the initial communication link is established over the BSM assuming that the exchanged data is partially known at both nodes. This scenario is suitable for channel training. In the second scenario, the BSM is adaptively updated while the real unknown data is exchanged between the nodes i.e. no capacity is wasted for channel identification. The proposed adaptive algorithm is robust to noise as the involved step-size allows a trade-off to reduce the impact of the additive noise at the expense of some estimation delay. Our computer simulations show that the proposed algorithm works efficiently in both modes of operations (training mode and simultaneous training/data transmission mode) for both static and slow fading MIMO channels and for both white and colored noises.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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".