Distributed Massive MIMO Systems With Non-Reciprocal Channels: Impacts and Robust Beamforming
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Hardware calibration is essential to restore the uplink/downlink channel reciprocity for multi-user massive multiple-input multiple-output (MIMO) systems operating in a time division duplexing mode. Unfortunately, due to the associated overhead, calibration cannot be performed frequently; furthermore, any calibration procedure leaves behind a residual mismatch between the uplink and downlink channels. In this paper, we study the effects of these calibration errors on the achievable rates in the downlink of a multi-cell, multi-user, and distributed massive MIMO system. Specifically, we develop accurate, yet simple, lower-bounds on the per-user achievable rate, assuming either zero-forcing (ZF) or matched filtering (MF) are used. We also introduce a performance loss coefficient as a measure of sensitivity of the performance to the calibration errors. Using this measure, we identify the conditions under which ZF precoding is more sensitive to calibration errors than MF. Finally, we consider the robust weighted sum-rate maximization problem to mitigate the degrading effects of non-ideal calibration. Our numerical experiments show that the rate lower-bounds developed in this paper accurately quantify the impacts of non-ideal calibration on performance. Also, the proposed robust beamforming scheme improves the average sum-rate by up to 42% compared with the other available schemes.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it