Power allocation and performance analysis of the collaborative NOMA assisted relaying systems in 5G
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Serving multiple cell-edge mobile terminals poses multifaceted challenges due to the increased transmission power and interferences, which could be overcome by relay communications. With the recent advancement of 5G technologies, non-orthogonal multiple access (NOMA) has been used at relay node to transmit multiple messages simultaneously to multiple cell-edge users. In this paper, a Collaborative NOMA Assisted Relaying (CNAR) system for 5G is proposed by enabling the collaboration of source-relay (S-R) and relay-destination (R-D) NOMA links. The relay node of the CNAR decodes the message for itself from S-R NOMA signal and transmits the remaining messages to the multiple cell-edge users in R-D link. A simplified-CNAR (S-CNAR) system is then developed to reduce the relay complexity. The outage probabilities for both systems are analyzed by considering outage behaviors in S-R and R-D links separately. To guarantee the data rate, the optimal power allocation among NOMA users is achieved by minimizing the outage probability. The ergodic sum capacity in high SNR regime is also approximated. Our mathematical analysis and simulation results show that CNAR system outperforms existing transmission strategies and S-CNAR reaches similar performance with 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.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 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 it