Network beamforming for asynchronous MIMO two-way relay networks
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We consider a single-carrier asynchronous relay network, where two transceivers wish to communicate with the help of multiple multi-antenna relays. In an asynchronous network, the signal transmitted by any of the two transceivers arrives at different relays with significantly different delays. Similarly, the signals forwarded by different relays arrive at the receiver frontend of any of the two transceivers with different delays. In such a network, aiming to minimize the total transmit power consumed in the entire network, we obtain the relay beamforming matrices and the transceivers' transmit powers such that two given date rates at the two transceivers are to be satisfied. We develop a model for the end-to-end channel and use this model to address the network beamforming problem. Assuming symmetric relay beamforming matrices, we present a computationally efficient solution to this problem. The numerical results show that for a given total number of antennas, there is an optimal number of antennas per relays which results in the lowest total power consumption in the entire network.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".