Cooperative Transmission with Constant Envelope Modulations and Phase-Only Forward Relays
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We propose the concept of Phase-Only Forward (PF) relays for cooperative communication involving constant envelope modulations. The technique enables the relaying nodes to maintain constant envelope signaling without the need to perform decoding and signal re-modulation. The bit-error-probability (BEP) of this PF technique, in conjunction with constant envelope CPFSK modulation in a time-selective Rayleigh fading environment and discriminator detection, was analyzed. Both cases of with and without antenna selection at the relay were considered. In the former case, a clever phase-adjustment scheme that allows the relay to maintain phase continuity was proposed. Our results indicate that without antenna selection, PF has a lower BEP than decode-and-forward (DF). It also delivers the same performance as amplify-and-forward (AF) when fading is quasi-static. In a time-selective fading environment, PF is not as efficient as AF without antenna selection. However with dual-antenna selection at the relay, PF has practically the same performance as AF even in a time-selective fading environment. We thus believe that PF is a cost-effective alternative to AF and DF, since signal re-modulation and expensive linear amplifiers are no longer needed at the relay to support non-constant envelope transmission. Finally, this phase-forward concept can be generalized to other continuous-phase modulation schemes as well as to PSK.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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".