MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Performance Analysis for Multihop Relaying Channels with Nakagami-m Fading: Ergodic Capacity Upper-Bounds and Outage Probability

2012· article· en· W2155165039 on OpenAlexaff
Vahid Asghari, Daniel Benevides da Costa, Sonia Aı̈ssa

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Communications · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicCooperative Communication and Network Coding
Canadian institutionsInstitut National de la Recherche ScientifiqueUniversité du Québec à Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNakagami distributionFadingErgodic theoryUpper and lower boundsTopology (electrical circuits)Independent and identically distributed random variablesMoment-generating functionComputer scienceSignal-to-noise ratio (imaging)Channel state informationContext (archaeology)MathematicsChannel capacityChannel (broadcasting)TelecommunicationsProbability density functionWirelessRandom variableStatisticsCombinatoricsMathematical analysis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper investigates the ergodic capacity and outage probability performance of multihop relaying networks subject to independent non-identically distributed Nakagami-m fading. Particularly, we exploit a typical amplify-and-forward relaying system with an arbitrary number of cooperative intermediate relays and no direct link between the source and destination nodes. In our analysis, channel state information is assumed to be known only at the receiving nodes and the cooperative links may have distinct fading parameters and distinct average signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) levels. In this context, a tight closed-form upper bound expression for the ergodic capacity is derived. For this, firstly the moment generating function (MGF) of the inverse of the end-to-end SNR is obtained in closed-form. Then, making use of this expression, an upper bound for the ergodic capacity is attained. Thereafter, we investigate the end-to-end outage probability performance of the multihop relaying channels in Nakagami-m fading by making use of the aforementioned MGF expression. Finally, Monte-Carlo simulation results are provided and show the tightness of the proposed 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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.793
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
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 head0.099
GPT teacher head0.292
Teacher spread0.194 · 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.

Study designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations26
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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