MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2136915087 · doi:10.1109/glocom.2008.ecp.787

On Optimal Power Allocation for Source-Orthogonal Relay-Nonorthogonal Amplify-and-Forward Relaying

2008· article· en· W2136915087 on OpenAlexaff
Reza Nikjah, Norman C. Beaulieu

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicCooperative Communication and Network Coding
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRelayUpper and lower boundsMathematical optimizationPower (physics)Computer scienceChannel (broadcasting)Selection (genetic algorithm)Optimization problemAsymptotically optimal algorithmMathematicsTelecommunications

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

An amplify-and-forward relaying network where the source is orthogonal to all the relays but the relays are nonorthogonal (SORNAF) is studied. The problem of relay power optimization in a SORNAF relaying scheme is formulated as a nonconcave fractional program. Selection amplify-and-forward (SAF) relaying is a possible power allocation strategy previously proposed for the SORNAF scheme. A necessary condition for the optimality of the SAF power allocation is derived in terms of instantaneous channel coefficients, based on which, an upper bound on the SAF optimality probability is calculated. The upper bound approaches zero almost exponentially as the number of relays increases, showing that SAF relaying is asymptotically strictly suboptimal. A suboptimal power allocation, which is significantly superior to the SAF algorithm in terms of outage performance, is also proposed for SORNAF relaying.

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)0.004
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 score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
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 head0.038
GPT teacher head0.270
Teacher spread0.232 · 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

Citations1
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicCooperative Communication and Network Coding→French-language works237,207→