MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2144802563 · doi:10.1109/twc.2007.060180

Non-Coherent and Mismatched-Coherent Receivers for Distributed STBCs with Amplify-and-Forward Relaying

2007· article· en· W2144802563 on OpenAlexaff
H. Mheidat, Murat Uysal

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Wireless Communications · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicCooperative Communication and Network Coding
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceRelayDecoding methodsCooperative diversityFadingAntenna diversityRobustness (evolution)Transmission (telecommunications)Channel (broadcasting)AlgorithmChannel state informationElectronic engineeringRelay channelTopology (electrical circuits)Computer networkTelecommunicationsWirelessEngineeringElectrical engineeringPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cooperative diversity is a transmission technique where multiple nodes in a network cooperate to form a virtual antenna array realizing the benefits of spatial diversity in a distributed fashion. The coherent scenario considered in most existing work on cooperative diversity assumes the availability of perfect channel state information at the relay and destination terminals and is highly unrealistic in practical applications. In this paper, we investigate non-coherent and mismatched-coherent receivers for a cooperative diversity scheme assuming both quasi-static and time-varying fading channels for the underlying cooperative links. Specifically, we consider a distributed space- time block coded (STBC) system in a single-relay scenario operating in the amplify-and-forward relaying mode. Exploiting the orthogonal structure of distributed STBC, we first derive a non-coherent decoding rule which can be implemented in practice by a Viterbi-type algorithm. Although this decoding rule has been derived assuming quasi-static channels,- its inherent channel tracking capability allows its deployment over time- varying channels with a promising performance as a sub-optimal solution. As a possible alternative to non-coherent detection, we investigate the performance of mismatched-coherent receiver (i.e., coherent detection with imperfect channel estimation) within the considered relay-assisted transmission scenario. We further compare the performance of non-coherent and mismatched- coherent receivers to reveal their robustness under various mobility scenarios.

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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.038
GPT teacher head0.288
Teacher spread0.250 · 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

Citations70
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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