Performance Analysis of Dual-Hop MIMO AF Relaying Network With Multiple Interferences
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this paper, we investigate the performance of a dual-hop multiple-input-multiple-output (MIMO) amplify-and-forward (AF) relay network, where the source, relay, and destination are all equipped with multiple antennas. By using maximum ratio transmission (MRT) at the transmitter and maximum ratio combining (MRC) at the receiver, we first obtain the output signal-to-interference-plus-noise ratio (SINR) of the dual-hop AF relay system, considering multiple cochannel interferences (CCIs), as well as noise at the relay. Then, we derive an exact closed-form expression for the outage probability (OP), and the asymptotic result of OP at high SNR, which can be used to calculate the array gain and diversity order. Finally, computer simulations are conducted to validate the performance analysis. Our new analytical expressions not only provide a fast and efficient method to evaluate the system performance but enable us to gain valuable insights into the effects of key parameters on the MIMO AF relaying network performance that benefits from implementing multiple antennas at each of the three nodes as well.
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 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".