MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3092396444 · doi:10.1109/tvt.2020.3029067

Performance Analysis and Optimization of Bidirectional Overlay Cognitive Radio Networks With Hybrid-SWIPT

2020· article· en· W3092396444 on OpenAlexafffund

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Vehicular Technology · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicEnergy Harvesting in Wireless Networks
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
FundersUniversity of Saskatchewan
KeywordsCognitive radioRelayEnergy harvestingMaximum power transfer theoremWirelessFadingTransmission (telecommunications)Energy (signal processing)Overlay

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper considers a cooperative cognitive radio network with two primary users (PUs), and two secondary users (SUs) that enables two-way communications of primary, and secondary systems in conjunction with non-linear energy harvesting based simultaneous wireless information, and power transfer (SWIPT). With the considered network, SUs are able to realize their communications over the licensed spectrum while extending relay assistance to the PUs. The overall bidirectional end-to-end transmission takes place in four phases, which include both energy harvesting (EH), and information transfer. A non-linear energy harvester with a hybrid SWIPT scheme is adopted in which both power-splitting, and time-switching EH techniques are used. The SUs aid in relay cooperation by performing an amplify-and-forward operation, whereas selection combining technique is adopted at the PUs to extract the intended signal from multiple received signals broadcasted by the SUs. Accurate outage probability expressions for the primary, and secondary links are derived under the Nakagami-m fading environment. Further, the system behavior is analyzed with respect to achievable system throughput, and energy efficiency. Since the performance of the considered system is strongly affected by the spectrum sharing factor, and hybrid SWIPT parameters, particle swarm optimization is implemented to optimize the system parameters so as to maximize the system throughput, and energy efficiency. Simulation results are provided to corroborate the performance analysis, and give useful insights into the system behavior concerning various system/channel parameters.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.688
Threshold uncertainty score0.709

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.176
Teacher spread0.171 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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

Citations39
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Vehicular TechnologySame topicEnergy Harvesting in Wireless NetworksFrench-language works237,207