Symbol-by-Symbol Maximum Likelihood Detection for Cooperative Molecular Communication
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this paper, symbol-by-symbol maximum likelihood (ML) detection is proposed for a cooperative diffusion-based molecular communication (MC) system. In this system, the transmitter (TX) sends a common information symbol to multiple receivers (RXs) and a fusion center (FC) chooses the TX symbol that is more likely, given the likelihood of its observations from all RXs. The transmission of a sequence of binary symbols and the resultant intersymbol interference are considered in the cooperative MC system. Three ML detection variants are proposed according to different RX behaviors and different knowledge at the FC. The system error probabilities for two ML detector variants are derived, one of which is in closed form. The optimal molecule allocation among RXs to minimize the system error probability of one variant is determined by solving a joint optimization problem. Also for this variant, the equal distribution of molecules among two symmetric RXs is analytically shown to achieve the local minimal error probability. Numerical and simulation results show that the ML detection variants provide lower bounds on the error performance of simpler, non-ML cooperative variants and demonstrate that these simpler cooperative variants have error performance comparable to ML detectors.
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 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 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".