Multi-User Regularized Zero-Forcing 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
Regularized zero-forcing beamforming (RZFB) is an interesting class of linear signal processing problems, which is very attractive for use in large-scale communication networks due its simple visualization as a straightforward extension of the well-accepted zero-forcing beamforming (ZFB). However, unlike ZFB, which is multi-user interference free, RZFB must manage multi-user interference to achieve its high throughput performance. Most existing works focus on the performance analysis of particular RZBF schemes such as the equip-power allocated RZBF under a fixed regularization parameter. This paper is the first work to consider the joint design of power allocation and regularization parameter for RZFB to maximize the worst users' throughput or the quality-of-service awarded energy efficiency under a fixed transmit power constraint. Such designs pose very computationally challenging optimization problems, for which the paper proposes two-stage optimization algorithms of low computational complexity. Their computational and performance efficiencies are substantiated through numerical examples.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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