MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Outage Probability and Optimum Combining for Time Division Broadcast Protocol

2011· article· en· W2111917392 on OpenAlexaff
Zhihang Yi, MinChul Ju, Il‐Min Kim

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Wireless Communications · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicCooperative Communication and Network Coding
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceRelayBroadcasting (networking)Protocol (science)Upper and lower boundsOutage probabilityComputer networkChannel (broadcasting)MultiplexingSignal-to-noise ratio (imaging)Division (mathematics)Terminal (telecommunication)Topology (electrical circuits)FadingTelecommunicationsMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Time division broadcasting (TDBC) is a well-known bidirectional protocol. In this protocol, two sources exchange information with the help of a relay terminal. For amplify-and-forward (AF)-based TDBC, we first derive a tight lower bound of the outage probability in closed-form, and it is very close to the exact outage probability in the whole signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) range irrespective of the values of channel variances. Using the tight lower bound, diversity-multiplexing tradeoff of the TDBC protocol is obtained for finite-SNR. Furthermore, we investigate how to optimize the TDBC protocol; specifically, an optimum method to combine the received signals at the relay terminal is developed. This method minimizes the outage probability and maximizes the total mutual information of the TDBC protocol at the same time.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.017
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.019

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.017
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.092
GPT teacher head0.314
Teacher spread0.223 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations46
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Wireless CommunicationsSame topicCooperative Communication and Network CodingFrench-language works237,207