Exact Coverage Analysis of Intelligent Reflecting Surfaces With Nakagami-<i>M</i>Channels
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Intelligent Reflecting Surfaces (IRS) are a promising solution to enhance the coverage of future wireless networks by tuning low-cost passive reflecting elements (referred to as metasurfaces), thereby constructing a favorable wireless propagation environment. Different from prior works, which assume Rayleigh fading channels and do not consider the direct link between a base station and a user, this article develops a framework based on moment generation functions (MGF) to characterize the coverage probability of a user in an IRS-aided wireless systems with generic Nakagami-m fading channels in the presence of direct links. In addition, we demonstrate that the proposed framework is tractable for both finite and asymptotically large values of the metasurfaces. Furthermore, we derive the channel hardening factor as a function of the shape factor of Nakagami-m fading channel and the number of IRS elements. Finally, we derive a closed-form expression to calculate the maximum coverage range of the IRS for given network parameters. Numerical results obtained from Monte-Carlo simulations validate the derived analytical results.
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 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 | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 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 it