MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2785580603 · doi:10.1109/vtcfall.2017.8287996

Diversity Analysis of MIMO Network Coded Cooperation Systems with Relay Selection

2017· article· en· W2785580603 on OpenAlexaff
Ali Reza Heidarpour, Masoud Ardakani

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicCooperative Communication and Network Coding
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRelayMIMOSelection (genetic algorithm)Computer scienceDiversity gainOutage probabilityEncoding (memory)ThroughputAntenna (radio)Communications systemTopology (electrical circuits)Decoding methodsComputer networkTelecommunicationsWirelessEngineeringPower (physics)BeamformingFadingElectrical engineeringArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Network coded cooperation (NCC) has recently gained interest due to its ability to increase the network throughput in multisource cooperative systems. NCC with single relay selection (SRS) or multiple relay selection (MRS) has been studied for single-antenna terminals only. Employing multiple-input multiple-output (MIMO) can significantly improve the performance of NCC systems. In this paper, we consider a NCC system with decode-and-forward (DF) relaying where relays use maximum distance separable (MDS) codes as their encoding vectors. More specifically, we consider N sources, M relays and a single destination. Relays and the destination are equipped with multiple antennas whereas sources have single antenna. The performance of the system under consideration is investigated by deriving exact outage probability expressions for both SRS and MRS protocols. The asymptotical diversity orders are further provided to obtain valuable insights into practical system design. Furthermore, numerical results are provided to validate the accuracy of our derivations and quantify the effect of system parameters on the outage probability and 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 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 categoriesScience and technology studies
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 score0.894
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
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 head0.041
GPT teacher head0.268
Teacher spread0.228 · 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 topicCooperative Communication and Network CodingFrench-language works237,207