MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3106348509

A Delay-Constrained Protocol with Adaptive Mode Selection for Bidirectional Relay Networks

2016· preprint· en· W3106348509 on OpenAlexaff
Vahid Jamali, Nikola Zlatanov, Robert Schober

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicCooperative Communication and Network Coding
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRelayComputer scienceComputer networkNode (physics)ThroughputTransmission (telecommunications)Upper and lower boundsFadingRelay channelTransmission delayQueueMarkov chainNetwork packetWirelessChannel (broadcasting)TelecommunicationsPower (physics)MathematicsEngineering
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, we consider a bidirectional relay network with half-duplex nodes and block fading where the nodes transmit with a fixed transmission rate. Thereby, user 1 and user 2 exchange information only via a relay node, i.e., a direct link between both users is not present. Recently in [1], it was shown that a considerable gain in terms of sum throughput can be obtained in bidirectional relaying by optimally selecting the transmission modes or, equivalently, the states of the nodes, i.e., the transmit, the receive, and the silent states, in each time slot based on the qualities of the involved links. To enable adaptive transmission mode selection, the relay has to be equipped with two buffers for storage of the data received from the two users. However, the protocol proposed in [1] was delay-unconstrained and provides an upper bound for the performance of practical delay-constrained protocols. In this paper, we propose a heuristic but efficient delay-constrained protocol which can approach the performance upper bound reported in [1]. Moreover, the average throughput and delay of the protocol are evaluated by analyzing the Markov chain of the states of the queues.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.045
GPT teacher head0.313
Teacher spread0.268 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations1
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicCooperative Communication and Network Coding→French-language works237,207→