MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2116074433 · doi:10.1109/glocom.2009.5425752

Joint Power Allocation and Relay Selection in Cooperative Networks

2009· article· en· W2116074433 on OpenAlexafffund
Khoa T. Phan, Duy H. N. Nguyen, Tho Le‐Ngoc

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicCooperative Communication and Network Coding
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
FundersMcGill UniversityMassachusetts Institute of Technology
KeywordsRelayMathematical optimizationComputer scienceMaximizationSelection (genetic algorithm)Joint (building)Relaxation (psychology)Transmitter power outputPower (physics)Optimization problemRelaxation techniqueMinificationTransmission (telecommunications)Set (abstract data type)Resource allocationMathematicsComputer networkTelecommunicationsEngineeringArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, we study the joint power allocation and relay selection problem for multi-user amplify-and-forward (AF) cooperative networks. To increase the system's spectral efficiency under the orthogonal transmission assumption, each source-destination pair is constrained to be assisted by a small subset of a set of available relays. The aim of this work is to establish a framework that determines which relays to help which users and with how much power. In particular, we propose the joint schemes under two design criteria: i) maximization of user rates, and ii) minimization of the total transmit power at the relays. As the original problem formulations are shown to be nonconvex integer optimization problems, and thus, are combinatorially hard, we also propose an efficient convex relaxation approach to solve the problems with low complexity. Numerical results demonstrate the effectiveness of the proposed approaches.

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)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.259
Teacher spread0.236 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations42
Published2009
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicCooperative Communication and Network CodingFrench-language works237,207