MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2154578572 · doi:10.1109/glocom.2010.5683370

Transmit Antenna Selection Strategies for Cooperative MIMO AF Relay Networks

2010· article· en· W2154578572 on OpenAlexaff
Gayan Amarasuriya, Chintha Tellambura, Masoud Ardakani

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicCooperative Communication and Network Coding
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRayleigh fadingRelayMoment-generating functionMIMOCumulative distribution functionComputer scienceMonte Carlo methodUpper and lower boundsSelection (genetic algorithm)Signal-to-noise ratio (imaging)Topology (electrical circuits)Control theory (sociology)Channel (broadcasting)Probability density functionMathematical optimizationFadingTelecommunicationsMathematicsStatisticsPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, an analytical framework is developed for the performance analysis of three transmit antenna selection (TAS) strategies for dual-hop multiple-input multiple-output channel-assisted amplify-and-forward (CA-AF) relay networks over Rayleigh fading. The cumulative distribution function of a lower bound of the end-to-end signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) of the optimal TAS strategy is derived and used to obtain the upper bounds of the outage probability and the average symbol error rate (SER). The exact moment generating functions (MGFs) of the end-to-end SNR of two suboptimal TAS strategies are also derived for the ideal CA-AF MIMO relay networks. These MGFs are then used to present accurate and efficient closed-form approximations to evaluate the outage probability and average SER. Numerical and Monte-Carlo simulation results are provided to analyze the performance of the system and to verify the accuracy of our analytical framework.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.974
Threshold uncertainty score0.486

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.279
Teacher spread0.253 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations14
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicCooperative Communication and Network CodingFrench-language works237,207