MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2963333837 · doi:10.1109/twc.2014.2332166

Fading Two-Way Relay Channels: Physical-Layer Versus Digital Network Coding

2014· article· en· W2963333837 on OpenAlexaff
Zhi Chen, Teng Joon Lim, Mehul Motani

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Wireless Communications · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicCooperative Communication and Network Coding
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLinear network codingComputer scienceFadingRelayChannel state informationTransmission (telecommunications)Physical layerCode wordChannel (broadcasting)Computer networkAlgorithmCoding (social sciences)Energy (signal processing)Node (physics)Decoding methodsNetwork packetWirelessTelecommunicationsMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, we consider three transmit strategies for the fading three-node two-way relay network, namely, physical-layer network coding (PNC), digital network coding (DNC), and codeword superposition (CW-Sup). The aim is to minimize the total average energy needed to deliver a given pair of required average rates. Full channel state information is assumed to be available at all transmitters and receivers. The optimization problems corresponding to the various strategies in fading channels are formulated, solved, and compared. For the DNC-based strategies, a simple time sharing of transmission of the network-coded message and the remaining bits of the larger message (DNC-TS) is considered first. We extend this approach to include a superposition strategy (DNC-Sup), in which the network-coded message and the remainder of the longer source message are superimposed before transmission. It is theoretically demonstrated that DNC-Sup outperforms DNC-TS and CW-Sup in terms of total average energy usage. More importantly, it is shown in the simulation that DNC-Sup performs better than PNC if the required rate is low and worse otherwise. Finally, an algorithm to select the optimal strategy in terms of energy usage subject to different rate pair requirements is presented.

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), Science and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.983
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
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0040.000
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 head0.063
GPT teacher head0.302
Teacher spread0.240 · 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

Citations12
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Wireless CommunicationsSame topicCooperative Communication and Network CodingFrench-language works237,207