Hybrid macro/microdiversity techniques in the reverse-link wireless communication networks
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We investigate microdiversity-augmented macrodiversity techniques in wireless communication networks. The setup consists of K widely separated access ports each carrying N antennas. The conventional selection macrodiversity (Scheme I) and two proposed methods (Scheme II and Scheme III) for port selection are investigated and their performance are compared. Scheme II utilizes the advancement in distributed antennas and radio-on-fiber technologies whereas Scheme III utilizes these technologies in a way similar to the soft handover of CDMA systems. After the port selection, the microdiversity uses n strongest signals (n les N) of the selected port for diversity combining if practical constraints preclude the use of all N signals. Analytical performance expressions for the probability of error and outage probability for Scheme I are developed. Simulations are used to investigate Scheme II and Scheme III and it is observed that these latter schemes exhibit performance superiority over the conventional macrodiversity selection method. The power savings obtained using the proposed architecture and new selection schemes could be used either for coverage extension or to increase capacity in wireless networks
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.014 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".