Orthogonal block code design for frequency-selective multiple antenna channels
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Orthogonal space-time block codes (OSTBCs) have several desirable properties for delay limited communication over a coherent narrowband (/sub at/) fading multiple antenna channel. In particular, they provide full diversity, and maximum likelihood detection can be achieved via linear processing and symbol-by-symbol detection. As a result, the maximal symbol rate and minimal latencies of OSTBCs have been well studied. In this paper, we construct orthogonal block codes for frequency-selective multiple antenna channels, and study their symbol rate and latency properties. Our code construction is based on direct application of the orthogonality constraints. This enables us to show that the maximum symbol rate of an orthogonal block code for a channel with memory length L is 1/L times the maximum rate of an OSTBC for the same antenna configuration. Orthogonal codes that achieve this maximal rate can be simply constructed via the Kronecker product of a rate maximal OSTBC with an identity matrix of size L. This Kronecker design scheme can also be applied to construct orthogonal block codes for frequency-selective channels with other desirable properties, such as minimal latency.
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 | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".