MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2548939748

Performance analysis of Decode-and-Forward cooperative networks with best relay selection

2012· article· en· W2548939748 on OpenAlexaff
Khaled Eshteiwi, M. Reza Soleymani

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Conference on Communications · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicCooperative Communication and Network Coding
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRelayRelay channelDecodesComputer scienceCooperative diversitySelection (genetic algorithm)Node (physics)Computer networkLink Access Procedure for Frame RelayHop (telecommunications)Topology (electrical circuits)Channel (broadcasting)Decoding methodsPower (physics)TelecommunicationsMathematicsFadingEngineeringArtificial intelligence
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Decode-and-Forward (DAF) relay strategy is the most popular cooperative diversity scheme due to its performance. Selection DAF (SDAF), relaying single or multiple relay selection, has recently been proven to achieve the same diversity order with lower power consumption than all-participate (AP) networks. Most SDAF methods assume constant power for the best relay, regardless of channel conditions. In the SDAF method, the relay decodes the received signal and re-encodes it to forward it to its destination. We propose a single relay selection strategy for two-hop relay networks. We specify a factor for each relay based on their outage probability criterion and the relay with the lowest probability of outage is selected for further cooperation for DAF scheme. In this paper, we suggest a method to select the best relay, where the destination node decides to cooperate with the relay nodes according to it is own the lowest outage probability for each link between destination-relays nodes. In particular, we derive an expression for Cumulative Distribution Function (CDF) for the total SNR for SDAF. Our simulation results show that this method outperforms AP-DAF method, and can keep a full diversity order.

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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.020

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
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 head0.081
GPT teacher head0.334
Teacher spread0.253 · 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

Citations5
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Conference on CommunicationsSame topicCooperative Communication and Network CodingFrench-language works237,207