MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2109465956 · doi:10.1109/iscas.2011.5937662

Performance analysis of lattice-reduction algorithms for a novel LR-compatible K-Best MIMO detector

2011· article· en· W2109465956 on OpenAlexaff
Ameer Youssef, Mahdi Shabany, P.G. Gulak

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicError Correcting Code Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLattice reductionAlgorithmMIMOReduction (mathematics)DetectorComputer scienceComputational complexity theoryTree (set theory)MathematicsTelecommunicationsCombinatoricsChannel (broadcasting)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Lattice Reduction (LR) has been proposed as a method to enhance the performance of MIMO detectors such as ZF, MMSE and V-BLAST. Until recently, the application of LR to the superior K-Best tree-search detection algorithm was not practical due to the significant increase in complexity of K-Best as a result of the distortion of tree symmetry caused by LR. However, in our recently published work we developed an innovative K-Best algorithm to accommodate tree-asymmetry with no additional complexity. In this work, we build on this result and perform a detailed analysis of the effect of various LR algorithms on the performance of LR-aided K-Best. We show that LLL and Seysen provide equivalent performance enhancement, however, LLL displays a lower computational complexity and thus is more suitable for LR-aided K-Best. In this work we also show that the application of LR to K-Best allows a large reduction of the K value while maintaining its near-ML performance. For 64-QAM MIMO detection, this leads to about 70% reduction in the complexity of the K-Best detector.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.755
Threshold uncertainty score0.522

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.084
GPT teacher head0.294
Teacher spread0.211 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations2
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicError Correcting Code TechniquesFrench-language works237,207