MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2279151890 · doi:10.1109/camad.2015.7390472

On the performance of future full-duplex relay selection networks

2015· article· en· W2279151890 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicFull-Duplex Wireless Communications
Canadian institutionsInstitut National de la Recherche ScientifiqueUniversité du Québec à Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNakagami distributionRelayFadingComputer scienceCumulative distribution functionInterference (communication)Outage probabilityTransmission (telecommunications)Signal-to-interference-plus-noise ratioCo-channel interferenceSignal-to-noise ratio (imaging)Topology (electrical circuits)ThroughputElectronic engineeringComputer networkTelecommunicationsWirelessMathematicsProbability density functionDecoding methodsEngineeringStatisticsPhysicsElectrical engineeringPower (physics)Channel (broadcasting)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We evaluate the performance of relay selection over Nakagami-m fading channels in the presence of a cluster of full-duplex decode-and-forward relays with self-interference. Specifically, we derive the exact cumulative distribution function of the end-to-end signal-to-interference-plus-noise ratio in the presence of a direct source-destination link. When a direct link exists, all dual-hop paths become mutually correlated due to the common direct-link interference. The presented exact results enable the evaluation of the outage performance and system throughput for fixed-rate transmission systems. The theoretical findings are verified by numerical simulations, where the severity of fading effect in the residual self-interference link is also discussed.

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.

Direct model labels (unvalidated)

Per-model category and study-design labels from the labeling rounds. They are machine output, unvalidated, and the disagreement between models ships as data. No study design here is MEDLINE-validated yet.

Model armCategoriesStudy designConfidence
gemmano category
Domain: not available · Genre: Empirical
About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no
Simulation or modelingmedium
gptno category
Domain: not available · Genre: Empirical
About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no
Simulation or modelinglow
models agreeAgreement compares identical category sets and study designs across arms.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.273

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.203
Teacher spread0.189 · 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

Quick stats

Citations8
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicFull-Duplex Wireless CommunicationsFrench-language works237,207