On the Optimal Performance in Asymmetric Gaussian Wireless Sensor Networks With Fading
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We study the estimation of a Gaussian source by a Gaussian wireless sensor network (WSN) whereLdistributed sensors transmit noisy observations of the source through a fading Gaussian multiple access channel to a fusion center. In a recent work Gastpar, [¿Uncoded transmission is exactly optimal for a Simple Gaussian Sensor Network¿,IEEE Trans. Inf. Theory, vol. 54, no. 11, pp. 5247-5251, Nov. 2008] showed that for a symmetric Gaussian WSN with no fading, uncoded (analog) transmission achieves the optimal performance theoretically attainable (OPTA). In this correspondence, we consider an asymmetric fading WSN in which the sensors have differing noise and transmission powers. We first present lower and upper bounds on the system's OPTA under random fading. We next focus on asymmetric networks with deterministic fading. By comparing the obtained lower and upper OPTA bounds under deterministic fading, we provide a sufficient condition for the optimality of the uncoded transmission scheme for a given power tuple \mbiP=(P1,P2,...,PL) . Then, allowing the sensor powers to vary under a weighted sum constraint (this includes the sum-power constraint as a special case), we obtain a sufficient condition for the optimality of uncoded transmission and provide the system's corresponding OPTA.
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 | 0.006 | 0.026 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".