Optimisation study of power allocation and relay location for amplify‐and‐forward systems over Nakagami‐<i>m</i>fading channels
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT We consider power allocation (PA) and relay positioning in a dual‐hop amplify‐and‐forward relaying system over Nakagami‐ m fading channels. We investigate adaptive PA with fixed relay location, optimal relay location with fixed PA, and joint optimisation of the PA and relay location under transmit power constraint in order to minimise average error probability and outage probability. Analytical results are validated by numerical simulations and comparisons between the different optimisation schemes and their performance are provided. Results show that optimum PA brings only coding gain, whereas optimum relay location yields, in addition to the latter, diversity gains as well. Also, joint optimisation improves both, the diversity gain and coding gain. Furthermore, results illustrate that the analysed adaptive algorithms outperform uniform schemes. Copyright © 2012 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
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.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 it