MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2125059246 · doi:10.1109/t-wc.2008.070582

On the design, selection algorithm and performance analysis of limited feedback transmit beamforming

2008· article· en· W2125059246 on OpenAlexaff
Alireza Ghaderipoor, Chintha Tellambura

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Wireless Communications · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced MIMO Systems Optimization
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceBeamformingSelection (genetic algorithm)AlgorithmSelection algorithmAlgorithm designMathematical optimizationTelecommunicationsMachine learningMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Multiple-input multiple-output (MIMO) systems achieve significant diversity and array gains by using transmit beamforming. When complete channel state information (CSI) is not available at the transmitter, a common set of beamformers (codebook) is used by both the transmitter and the receiver. For each channel realization, the best beamformer is selected at the receiver and its index is sent back to the transmitter via a limited feedback channel. In this paper, a codebook design method using the genetic algorithm is proposed, which reduces the design complexity and achieves large minimum-distance codebooks. Exploiting the specific structure of these beamformers, an order and bound algorithm is proposed to reduce the beamformer selection complexity at the receiver side. The exact bit error rate (BER) of the optimal beamforming in finite-series expression is used to facilitate the BER analysis of limited feedback beamforming. By employing a geometrical approach, an approximate BER of limited feedback beamforming is derived when the codebook size is relatively large (high resolution analysis). The simulation results show that the approximate BER is comparatively tight even for small size codebooks.

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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.899
Threshold uncertainty score0.622

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.229
Teacher spread0.202 · 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
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

Citations10
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Wireless CommunicationsSame topicAdvanced MIMO Systems OptimizationFrench-language works237,207