Mixed-ADC/DAC Multipair Massive MIMO Relaying Systems: Performance Analysis and Power Optimization
Bibliographic record
Abstract
High power consumption and expensive hardware are two bottlenecks for practical massive multiple-input multiple-output (mMIMO) systems. One promising solution is to employ low-resolution analog-to-digital converters (ADCs) and digital-to-analog converters (DACs). In this paper, we consider a general multipair mMIMO relaying system with a mixed-ADC/DAC architecture, in which some antennas are connected to low-resolution ADCs/DACs, while the rest of the antennas are connected to high-resolution ADCs/DACs. Leveraging on the additive quantization noise model, both exact and approximate closed-form expressions for the achievable rate are derived. It is shown that the achievable rate can approach the unquantized one by using only 2-3 bits of resolutions. Moreover, a power scaling law is presented to reveal that the transmit power can be scaled down inversely proportional to the number of antennas at the relay. We further propose an efficient power allocation scheme by solving a complementary geometric programming problem. In addition, a tradeoff between the achievable rate and power consumption for different numbers of low-resolution ADCs/DACs is investigated by deriving the energy efficiency. Our results reveal that the large antenna array can be exploited to enable the mixed-ADC/DAC architecture, which significantly reduces the power consumption and hardware cost for practical mMIMO systems.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 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) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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.
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".