Delay Analysis of Spatially-Coded MIMO-ZFBF with Retransmissions in Random Networks
Bibliographic record
Abstract
For a low-mobile Poisson bipolar network and under line-of-sight/non-line-of-sight (LOS/NLOS) path-loss model, we study repetitive retransmissions (RR) and blocked incremental redundancy (B-IR). We consider spatially-coded multiple-input multiple-output (MIMO) zero-forcing beamforming (ZFBF) multiplexing system, whereby the packet success reception is determined based on the aggregate data rate across spatial dimensions of the MIMO system. Characterization of retransmission performance in this low-mobile configuration is practically important, but inherently complex due to a substantial rate correlation across retransmissions and intractability of evaluating the probability density function (pdf) of aggregate data rate. Adopting tools of stochastic geometry, we firstly characterize the rate correlation coefficient (RCC) for both schemes. Our results show that, compared to RR scheme, B-IR scheme has higher RCC while its coverage probability is substantially larger. We demonstrate that the spotted contention between coverage probability and RCC causes the mean transmission delay (MTD) of B-IR to become either smaller or larger than the MTD of RR scheme. Finally, we develop a numerical approximation of MTD, and evaluate the effective spatial throughput (EST), which is reciprocal to MTD, of RR and B-IR schemes. Our numerical results highlight fundamental tradeoffs between densification, multiplexing gain, block length, and activity factor of nodes. We further observe that for dense networks 1) LOS component is considerably instrumental to enhance EST; 2) EST of B-IR scheme can be much higher than that of RR scheme; 3) When Doppler spread exists, it can improve MTD of B-IR while it does not cast any meaningful effect on the MTD of RR.
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 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 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".