Ergodic Capacity of Multi-Hop Wireless Relaying Systems in Rayleigh Fading
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The ergodic capacity in Rayleigh fading of multi- hop wireless transmission systems employing either amplify-and-forward relaying or decode-and-forward relaying is studied, assuming channel state information is only known at the receiving terminals. Two upper bounds based on Jensen's inequality and the harmonic-geometric means inequality as well as an infinite series representation for the ergodic capacity of an amplify-and- forward multi-hop transmission system are derived. Numerical results indicate the upper bound obtained based on Jensen's inequality is tight. This upper bound is tighter than the upper bound based on harmonic and geometric means for larger numbers of hops and especially for systems in non-identical fading. Numerical results are provided to show the high accuracy of the infinite series approach. In addition, the ergodic capacity of a decode-and-forward multi-hop transmission system is obtained. It is shown that multi-hop transmission systems employing a decode-and-forward relaying scheme achieve higher ergodic capacities than multi-hop transmission systems with amplify-and- forward relaying schemes.
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 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".