MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2757653856 · doi:10.1109/twc.2017.2753771

Coverage Analysis of Multi-Stream MIMO HetNets With MRC Receivers

2017· article· en· W2757653856 on OpenAlexafffund
Mohammad G. Khoshkholgh, Keivan Navaie, Kang G. Shin, Victor C. M. Leung

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Wireless Communications · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced MIMO Systems Optimization
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsMIMOComputer scienceMaximal-ratio combiningSpectral efficiencyData streamData stream miningMultiplexingStochastic geometryCoverage probabilityLeverage (statistics)Interference (communication)Channel (broadcasting)AlgorithmFadingTelecommunicationsData miningStatisticsMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Most of the current research on the coverage performance of multi-stream MIMO heterogeneous networks (HetNets) has focused on a single data-stream. This does not always provide accurate results as our analysis show the cross-stream correlation due to interference can greatly affect the coverage performance. This paper analyzes the coverage probability in such systems, and studies the impact of cross-stream correlation. Specifically, we focus on the max-SIR cell association policy and leverage stochastic geometry to study scenarios, whereby a receiver is considered in the coverage, if all of its data-streams are successfully decodeable. Assuming open-loop maximum ratio combining (MRC) at receivers, we consider the cases where partial channel state information is available at the receiver. We then obtain an upper-bound on the coverage and formulate cross-stream SIR correlation. We further show that approximating such systems based on fully-correlated (non-correlated) data-streams results in a slight underestimation (substantial overestimation) of the coverage performance. Our results provide insights on the multiplexing regimes where densification improves the coverage performance and spectral efficiency. We also compare MRC with more complex zero-forcing receiver and provide quantitative insights on the design tradeoffs. Our analysis is validated via extensive simulations.

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 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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.959
Threshold uncertainty score0.785

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 studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.272
Teacher spread0.245 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations6
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Wireless CommunicationsSame topicAdvanced MIMO Systems OptimizationFrench-language works237,207