MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2151262405 · doi:10.1109/jsac.2008.080216

A framework for designing mimo systems with decision feedback equalization or tomlinson-harashima precoding

2008· article· en· W2151262405 on OpenAlexaff
Michael Botros Shenouda, Timothy N. Davidson

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Journal on Selected Areas in Communications · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced MIMO Systems Optimization
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPrecodingComputer scienceTransceiverOptimal designMIMOMathematical optimizationConvex optimizationEqualization (audio)Control theory (sociology)MathematicsAlgorithmRegular polygonWirelessDecoding methodsBeamformingTelecommunications

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We consider joint transceiver design for point-to-point Multiple-Input Multiple-Output communication systems that implement interference (pre-)subtraction; i.e., Decision Feedback Equalization (DFE) or Tomlinson-Harashima precoding (THP). We develop a unified framework for joint transceiver design of these two dual systems by considering design criteria that are expressed as functions of the (logarithm of the) Mean Square Error (MSE) of the individual data streams. By deriving two inequalities that involve the logarithms of the individual MSEs, we obtain optimal designs for two broad classes of communication objectives, namely those that are Schur-convex and Schur-concave functions of these logarithms. These two classes embrace several design criteria for which the optimal transceiver design has remained an open problem. For Schur-convex objectives, the optimal design results in data streams with equal MSEs. In addition to other desirable properties, this design simultaneously minimizes the total MSE and the average bit error rate, and maximizes the Gaussian mutual information; a property that is not achieved by a linear transceiver. Moreover, we show that the optimal design yields objective values that are superior to the corresponding optimal objective value for a linear transceiver. For Schur-concave objectives, the optimal DFE design results in linear equalization and the optimal THP design results in linear precoding. The proposed design framework can be regarded as a counterpart of the existing framework for linear transceiver design.

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)0.001
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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
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)0.0020.000

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 head0.073
GPT teacher head0.320
Teacher spread0.248 · 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
GenreMethods

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

Citations77
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Journal on Selected Areas in CommunicationsSame topicAdvanced MIMO Systems OptimizationFrench-language works237,207