MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Asymptotically-Exact Performance Bounds of AF Multi-Hop Relaying over Nakagami Fading

2011· article· en· W2152610779 on OpenAlexaff
Gayan Amarasuriya, Chintha Tellambura, Masoud Ardakani

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Communications · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicCooperative Communication and Network Coding
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIndependent and identically distributed random variablesNakagami distributionFadingRayleigh fadingMoment-generating functionMathematicsHop (telecommunications)RelayUpper and lower boundsHarmonic meanTopology (electrical circuits)Cumulative distribution functionMaximal-ratio combiningAsymptotically optimal algorithmAlgorithmStatisticsProbability density functionComputer scienceTelecommunicationsCombinatoricsRandom variableMathematical analysisPhysicsDecoding methods

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A new class of upper bounds on the end-to-end signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) of channel-assisted amplify-and-forward (AF) multi-hop (N ≥ 2) relay networks is presented. It is the half-harmonic mean of the minimum of the first P ≥ 0 hop SNRs and the minimum of the remaining N-P hop SNRs. The parameter P varies between 0 to N and may be chosen to provide the tightest bound. The closed-form cumulative distribution function and moment generating function are derived for independent and non-identically distributed Rayleigh fading and for independent and identically distributed Nakagami-m fading, where m is an integer. The resulting outage probability and the average symbol error rate bounds are asymptotically-exact. The asymptotic-exactness holds for any 0 ≤ P ≤ N. As applications, two cases of multi-hop multi-branch relay networks (i) the best branch selection and (ii) maximal ratio combining reception are treated. Numerical results are provided to verify the comparative performance against the existing bounds.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.023
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.020

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.023
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.098
GPT teacher head0.301
Teacher spread0.203 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations46
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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