Optimal Power/Rate Allocation and Code Selection for Iterative Joint Detection of Coded Random CDMA
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Iterative interference cancellation of coded code-division multiple access (CDMA) using random spreading with linear cancellation is analyzed. If users are grouped into power classes and Shannon bound approaching codes are used, a geometric power distribution achieves the additive white Gaussian noise (AWGN) channel Shannon bound as the numbers of classes becomes large. The optimal distribution of the size of these classes is shown to be uniform. If users are grouped into different rate classes with equal powers among equal rate users, the Shannon bound for AWGN channels can be achieved with an arbitrary distribution of the classes sizes, provided that the size of the largest rate class obeys the mild condition that its ratio of size to processing gain is much smaller than the inverse of the signal-to-noise ratio (SNR). The case of equal powers and equal rates among all users is addressed as a "worst case" scenario. It is argued that simple repetition codes provide for a larger achievable capacity than stronger codes. It is shown that this capacity monotonically increases as the rate of the code decreases. A density evolution analysis is used to show that the achievable rates exceed those of a minimum-mean square error filter applied to the uncoded signals. This lower bound is tight for small ratios of bit energy to noise power, and otherwise the iterative cancellation receiver provides an appreciably larger capacity. Relating to recent result from the application of statistical mechanics it is shown that the repetition-coded system with iterative cancellation achieves the performance of an equivalent optimal joint detector for uncoded transmission
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 | 0.002 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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".