MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

On the Performance of Cooperative-Diversity Networks with the Nth Best-Relay Selection Scheme

2010· article· en· W2166757187 on OpenAlexaff
Salama Ikki, Mohamed H. Ahmed

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Communications · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicCooperative Communication and Network Coding
Canadian institutionsMemorial University of NewfoundlandUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRelayRayleigh fadingExpression (computer science)Cooperative diversityMoment-generating functionDiversity combiningSignal-to-noise ratio (imaging)Node (physics)Maximal-ratio combiningSelection (genetic algorithm)Closed-form expressionProbability density functionTopology (electrical circuits)Computer scienceFunction (biology)MathematicsAlgorithmFadingTelecommunicationsStatisticsCombinatoricsChannel (broadcasting)EngineeringPhysicsArtificial intelligencePower (physics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this letter, we consider the adaptive decode-and-forward (DF) and amplify-and-forward (AF) cooperative-diversity systems with the Nthbest-relay selection scheme. In the best-relay selection scheme, from the set of M relays the best relay only forwards the source signal to the destination. However, the best relay might be unavailable; hence we might resort to the second, third or generally the Nth best relay. We derive closed-form expressions for the symbol error probability, outage probability and asymptotic error probability. In particular, we derive a closed-form expression for the probability density function (PDF) of the signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) of the relayed signal at the destination node. Then, we find a closed-form expression for the moment generating function (MGF) of the output SNR at the destination. This MGF is used to derive the closed-form expressions of the performance metrics. All these expressions are derived over identical and non-identical Rayleigh fading channels. Results show that with the Nthbest relay the diversity order is equal to (M - N + 2) where M is the number of relays.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.010
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.018

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.002
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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.256
Teacher spread0.222 · 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 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

Citations147
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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