MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2780502444 · doi:10.1109/spawc.2017.8227726

Impact of residual transceiver impairments on MMSE filtering performance of Rayleigh-product MIMO channels

2017· article· en· W2780502444 on OpenAlexaff
Shree Krishna Sharma, Anastasios Papazafeiropoulos, Symeon Chatzinotas, Xianbin Wang, Tharm Ratnarajah

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced MIMO Systems Optimization
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTransceiverResidualMIMOComputer scienceMinimum mean square errorElectronic engineeringWirelessChannel (broadcasting)MathematicsAlgorithmTelecommunicationsEngineeringStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Recent studies have demonstrated the presence of residual transceiver hardware impairments even after employing calibration and compensation techniques in different wireless systems. The effect of these impairments becomes more severe in the systems involving a large number of inexpensive Radio Frequency (RF) chains such as massive Multiple Input Multiple Output (MIMO) systems due to the requirement of cost-efficient implementation. However, most of the existing studies consider ideal transceivers without incorporating the effect of residual hardware impairments. In this regard, this paper studies the impact of additive residual transceiver hardware impairments on the Minimum Mean Square Error (MMSE) filtering performance of Rayleigh-Product (RP) MIMO channels. Using principles from Random Matrix Theory (RMT), the MMSE filtering performance of the RP channels is analyzed and a tight lower bound is derived by taking the effects of residual additive transceiver impairments into account. Moreover, some useful insights on the performance of the considered system with respect to various parameters such as the transmit Signal to Noise Ratio (SNR), the number of scatterers and the severity of impairments on both the transmit and receive sides are provided.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.753
Threshold uncertainty score0.578

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 studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.264
Teacher spread0.247 · 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

Citations2
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAdvanced MIMO Systems OptimizationFrench-language works237,207