MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2119780651 · doi:10.1109/isit.2010.5513566

On the capacity of the half-duplex diamond channel

2010· preprint· en· W2119780651 on OpenAlexaff
Hossein Bagheri, Seyed Abolfazl Motahari, Amir K. Khandani

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicCooperative Communication and Network Coding
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDuplex (building)DiamondChannel (broadcasting)Computer scienceGeologyMaterials scienceComputer networkChemistryComposite material

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, a dual-hop communication system composed of a source S and a destination D connected through two non-interfering half-duplex relays, R1and R2, is considered. In the literature of Information Theory, this configuration is known as the diamond channel. In this setup, four transmission modes are present, namely: 1) S transmits, and R1and R2listen (broadcast mode), 2) S transmits, R1listens, and simultaneously, R2transmits and D listens. 3) S transmits, R2listens, and simultaneously, R1transmits and D listens. 4) R1, R2transmit, and D listens (multiple-access mode). Assuming a constant power constraint for all transmitters, a parameter Δ is defined, which captures some important features of the channel. It is proven that for Δ=0 the capacity of the channel can be attained by successive relaying, i.e, using modes 2 and 3 defined above in a successive manner. This strategy may have an infinite gap from the capacity of the channel when Δ≠0. To achieve rates as close as 0.71 bits to the capacity, it is shown that the cases of Δ >0 and Δ0, respectively. Furthermore, it is established that under average power constraints the aforementioned strategies achieve rates as close as 3.6 bits to the capacity of the channel.

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)0.016
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: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.043

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.016
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0030.006
Open science0.0020.004
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0130.002

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 head0.083
GPT teacher head0.273
Teacher spread0.190 · 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

Citations49
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicCooperative Communication and Network CodingFrench-language works237,207