MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2964200041 · doi:10.1109/access.2019.2930029

An Adaptive Approach for the Joint Antenna Selection and Beamforming Optimization

2019· article· en· W2964200041 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Access · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAntenna Design and Optimization
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
FundersFonds de recherche du Québec – Nature et technologiesNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaNanjing UniversityNanjing University of Posts and TelecommunicationsConselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e TecnológicoConcordia University
KeywordsBeamformingComputer scienceAdaptive beamformerSmart antennaTelecommunications linkAntenna (radio)Minimum mean square errorContext (archaeology)Computational complexity theoryOptimization problemAntenna arraySelection (genetic algorithm)Computer engineeringMathematical optimizationElectronic engineeringAlgorithmTelecommunicationsDirectional antennaMathematicsEngineeringArtificial intelligenceEstimator

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Adaptive beamforming techniques are widely known for their capability of leveraging the performance of antenna arrays. The effectiveness of such techniques typically increases as the number of antennas grows. In contrast, computational and hardware costs very often limit the deployment of beamforming in large-scale arrays. To circumvent this problem, antenna selection strategies have been developed aiming to maintain much of the performance gain obtained by using a large array while keeping computational and hardware costs at acceptable levels. In this context, the present paper is dedicated to the development of two new adaptive algorithms for solving the problem of joint antenna selection and beamforming for uplink reception in mobile communication systems. Both algorithms are based on an alternating optimization strategy and are designed to operate with a limited number of radio-frequency chains. The main difference between the proposed algorithms is that the first is formulated by considering the minimum mean-square error (MMSE) criterion, while the second is based on the minimum-variance distortionless-response (MVDR) approach. The numerical simulation results confirm the effectiveness of the proposed algorithms.

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.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.948
Threshold uncertainty score0.285

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 communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.241
Teacher spread0.214 · 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