MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Diversity and Delay Analysis of Buffer-Aided BICM-OFDM Relaying

2013· article· en· W2129564636 on OpenAlexaff
Toufiqul Islam, Aïssa Ikhlef, Robert Schober, Vijay K. Bhargava

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Wireless Communications · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicCooperative Communication and Network Coding
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPairwise error probabilityOrthogonal frequency-division multiplexingDiversity gainRelayComputer scienceDiversity schemeMultiplexingUpper and lower boundsCooperative diversityMaximal-ratio combiningWirelessAlgorithmBit error rateTopology (electrical circuits)Computer networkMathematicsTelecommunicationsFadingWireless networkChannel (broadcasting)Physics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, we study a cooperative diversity scheme for wireless systems where the relay is equipped with a buffer. We consider practical frequency—selective channels and adopt the combination of bit interleaved coded modulation and orthogonal frequency division multiplexing (BICM—OFDM). We propose a novel link selection protocol for BICM—OFDM systems where the relay either transmits or receives in a given time slot depending on the quality of the links. We derive a closed—form upper bound for the asymptotic worst—case pairwise error probability (PEP) and the diversity gain of the considered buffer—aided relaying scheme for both infinite and finite buffer size. We show that significant diversity gains can be achieved with buffer—aided relaying compared to conventional relaying at the expense of larger packet delays. In fact, for buffers of infinite (or very large) size, the diversity gain is doubled for links with identical frequency diversity, and an even higher diversity gain advantage is possible for links with non—identical frequency diversities. Furthermore, we perform an exact closed—form average delay analysis for buffers of both finite and infinite size which provides important insight into the achieved delay—performance tradeoff. The derived analytical results and performance gains are corroborated by extensive simulation results.

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)0.001
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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
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 head0.055
GPT teacher head0.276
Teacher spread0.221 · 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

Citations33
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Wireless CommunicationsSame topicCooperative Communication and Network CodingFrench-language works237,207