Joint transmit antenna selection and user scheduling for Massive MIMO systems
Bibliographic record
Abstract
It is largely accepted that the innovative technology of large-scale multiantenna systems (named Massive multiple input multiple output (MIMO) systems) will very probably be deployed in the fifth generation of mobile cellular networks. In order to render this technology feasible and efficient, many challenges have to be investigated before. In this paper, we consider the problem of antenna selection and user scheduling in Massive MIMO systems. Our objective is to maximize the sum of broadcasting data rates achieved by all the mobile users in one cell served by a massive MIMO transmitter. The optimal solution of this problem can be obtained through a highly complex exhaustive brute force search (BFS) over all possible combinations of antennas and users. This BFS solution cannot be implemented in practice even for small size systems because of its high computational complexity. Therefore, in this paper, we propose an algorithm that efficiently solves the problem of joint antenna selection and user scheduling. The proposed algorithm aims to maximize the achievable sum-rate and to benefit from both the spatial selectivity gain and multi-user diversity gain offered by the antenna selection and user scheduling, respectively. Compared with the optimal solution obtained by the highly complex BFS, the conducted performance evaluation and complexity analysis show that the proposed algorithm is able to achieve near-optimal performance with low computational 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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".