MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2944750697 · doi:10.1109/lwc.2019.2936854

On Coverage Probability in Uplink NOMA With Instantaneous Signal Power-Based User Ranking

2019· preprint· en· W2944750697 on OpenAlexafffund
Mohammad Salehi, Ekram Hossain

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Wireless Communications Letters · 2019
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced Wireless Communication Technologies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsTelecommunications linkNomaRanking (information retrieval)Base stationDecoding methodsComputer scienceSIGNAL (programming language)Interference (communication)Coverage probabilitySignal-to-noise ratio (imaging)Power (physics)Signal-to-interference-plus-noise ratioAlgorithmStatisticsTelecommunicationsMathematicsArtificial intelligencePhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In uplink non-orthogonal multiple access (NOMA) networks, the order of decoding at the base station (BS) depends on the received instantaneous signal powers (ISPs). Therefore, the signal-to-interference ratio (SIR) coverage probability for an uplink NOMA user should be calculated using the ISP-based ranking of the users. In the existing literature, however, mean signal power (MSP)-based ranking is used to determine the decoding order and calculate the SIR coverage probability. Although this approximation provides tractable results, it is not accurate. In this letter, we derive the coverage probability for ISP-based ranking, and we show that MSP-based ranking underestimates the SIR coverage probability.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.035
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.018

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.035
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.018
GPT teacher head0.236
Teacher spread0.218 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations1
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Wireless Communications LettersSame topicAdvanced Wireless Communication TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207