MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2771072580 · doi:10.1049/iet-com.2016.1431

Performance analysis of spectrum sharing‐based multi‐hop decode‐and‐forward over Nakagami‐ <i>m</i> fading channels subject to additive white generalised Gaussian noise

2017· article· en· W2771072580 on OpenAlexaff
Osamah S. Badarneh, Fares S. Almehmadi, Michel Kadoch

Bibliographic record

VenueIET Communications · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced Wireless Communication Techniques
Canadian institutionsÉcole de Technologie Supérieure
FundersUniversity of Tabuk
KeywordsFadingAdditive white Gaussian noiseNakagami distributionQAMQuadrature amplitude modulationTelecommunicationsComputer scienceBit error rateMathematicsUnderlayAlgorithmTopology (electrical circuits)White noiseSignal-to-noise ratio (imaging)Decoding methods

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this work, the authors study the performance of decode‐and‐forward cognitive multi‐hop networks in an underlay spectrum sharing strategy for Nakagami‐ m fading channels with additive white generalised Gaussian noise. To this end, new exact analytical expressions for the average bit error rate of M ‐ary quadrature amplitude modulation ( M ‐QAM) and M ‐ary phase shift keying are derived and evaluated. In addition, an exact expression for the average symbol error rate of M ‐QAM is provided. Moreover, lower‐ and upper‐bound expressions for the ergodic capacity are obtained. Different scenarios are presented to study the influence of various key system parameters, such as fading severity, noise shaping parameter, and interference temperature, on the system performance. The obtained analytical results are supported with Monte Carlo simulations to confirm the accuracy of the analytical derivations.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
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 score0.148
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0030.001
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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.303
Teacher spread0.272 · 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.

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 routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIET CommunicationsSame topicAdvanced Wireless Communication TechniquesFrench-language works237,207