MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

On Gaussian Interference Channels with Constellation-Based Transmitters

2012· article· en· W2153147836 on OpenAlexaff
Kamyar Moshksar, Akbar Ghasemi, Amir K. Khandani

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Communications Letters · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced Wireless Communication Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInterference (communication)Upper and lower boundsTopology (electrical circuits)Gaussian noiseTransmitterConstellationGaussianComputer scienceChannel (broadcasting)TelecommunicationsAlgorithmMultiplexingNoise (video)MathematicsPhysicsCombinatoricsMathematical analysisArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this letter, we study a two-user Gaussian Interference Channel (GIC) with constellation-based transmitters where both transmitters utilize PSK signaling and both receivers treat interference as noise. It is verified that if one user rotates its constellation appropriately compared to the constellation of the other user, the achievable sum-rate in the network considerably increases. Due to the fact that the noise plus interference at each receiver is mixed-Gaussian, there is no closed formula for the sum-rate. Using Fano's inequality, a lower bound is developed on the sum-rate in the network. The lower bound is tight in the sense that it identifies the optimal value for the angle of rotation. Moreover, it is demonstrated that the proposed lower bound can be larger than the exact value of sum-rate achieved by random Gaussian codes or Time-Division-Multiplexing (TDM).

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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.255
Teacher spread0.230 · 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
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

Citations7
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Communications LettersSame topicAdvanced Wireless Communication TechniquesFrench-language works237,207