MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2952966314 · doi:10.48550/arxiv.0904.1892

Lattice Strategies for the Dirty Multiple Access Channel

2009· preprint· en· W2952966314 on OpenAlexaff
Tal Philosof, Ram Zamir, Uri Erez, Ashish Khisti

Bibliographic record

VenueArXiv.org · 2009
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicWireless Communication Security Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsChannel (broadcasting)Lattice (music)Computer securityComputer scienceComputer networkBusinessPhysicsAcoustics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A generalization of the Gaussian dirty-paper problem to a multiple access setup is considered. There are two additive interference signals, one known to each transmitter but none to the receiver. The rates achievable using Costa's strategies (i.e. by a random binning scheme induced by Costa's auxiliary random variables) vanish in the limit when the interference signals are strong. In contrast, it is shown that lattice strategies ("lattice precoding") can achieve positive rates independent of the interferences, and in fact in some cases - which depend on the noise variance and power constraints - they are optimal. In particular, lattice strategies are optimal in the limit of high SNR. It is also shown that the gap between the achievable rate region and the capacity region is at most 0.167 bit. Thus, the dirty MAC is another instance of a network setup, like the Korner-Marton modulo-two sum problem, where linear coding is potentially better than random binning. Lattice transmission schemes and conditions for optimality for the asymmetric case, where there is only one interference which is known to one of the users (who serves as a "helper" to the other user), and for the "common interference" case are also derived. In the former case the gap between the helper achievable rate and its capacity is at most 0.085 bit.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.261
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.103
GPT teacher head0.327
Teacher spread0.224 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations5
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueArXiv.orgSame topicWireless Communication Security TechniquesFrench-language works237,207