On the performance of multi‐hop wireless relay networks
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT User cooperation has evolved as a popular coding technique in wireless relay networks (WRNs). Using the neighboring nodes as relays to establish a communication between a source and a destination achieves an increase of the diversity order. The relay nodes can be seen as a distributed multi‐antenna system, which can be exploited for transmit diversity by using distributed space–time block coding (STBC). In this paper, we investigate the bit error rate (BER) of multi‐hop WRNs employing distributed STBC at the relay nodes. We develop the general model of WRNs using distributed STBC, and we derive the pairwise error probability and an approximation of the BER. We examine the impact of several parameters, such as distributed STBC at the relays, the number of relays, the distances between the nodes, and the channel state information available at the receivers, on the BER performance of the multi‐hop WRN. The obtained results provide guidelines about the expected error performance and the design of channel estimation for these networks. Copyright © 2011 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
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.
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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| 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 it