MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2167040808 · doi:10.1109/tcomm.2009.09.070595

Relay ordering in a multi-hop cooperative diversity network

2009· article· en· W2167040808 on OpenAlexaff
Zhihang Yi, I.-M. Kim

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Communications · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicCooperative Communication and Network Coding
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRelayHop (telecommunications)Expression (computer science)AlgorithmComputer scienceComputational complexity theorySignal-to-noise ratio (imaging)Bit error rateDiversity combiningOutage probabilityCooperative diversityProbability of errorSelection (genetic algorithm)MathematicsMathematical optimizationTelecommunicationsDecoding methodsFadingArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, we first propose an optimum relay ordering algorithm for the multi-branch multi-hop cooperative diversity networks. This optimum algorithm has a high complexity that makes it hard to implement. Therefore, a suboptimum relay ordering algorithm, which considerably reduces the complexity, is then developed. Furthermore, for a cooperative network with two relays, we analytically evaluate the performance of the suboptimum algorithm by using an approximate end-to-end signal-to-noise ratio expression. Specifically, an approximate probability of wrong selection and an approximate expression of the symbol error rate are derived. The analysis and the numerical results demonstrate that the suboptimum algorithm performs very well as the optimum one at a much lower complexity.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
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 head0.087
GPT teacher head0.311
Teacher spread0.223 · 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

Citations29
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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