On Single-User Interactive Beam Alignment in Millimeter Wave Systems: Impact of Feedback Delay
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Narrow beams are key to wireless communications in millimeter wave frequency bands. Beam alignment (BA) allows the base station (BS) to adjust the direction and width of the beam used for communication. During BA, the BS transmits a number of scanning beams covering different angular regions. The goal is to minimize the expected width of the uncertainty region (UR) that includes the angle of departure of the user. Conventionally, in interactive BA, it is assumed that the feedback corresponding to each scanning packet is received prior to transmission of the next one. However, in practice, the feedback delay could be larger because of propagation or system constraints. This paper investigates BA strategies that operate under arbitrary fixed feedback delays. This problem is analyzed through a source coding perspective where the feedback sequences are viewed as source codewords. It is shown that these codewords form a codebook with a particular characteristic which is used to define a new class of codes called d—unimodal codes. By analyzing the properties of these codes, a lower bound on the minimum achievable expected beamwidth is provided. The results reveal potential performance improvements in terms of the BA duration it takes to achieve a fixed expected width of the UR over the state-of-the-art BA methods which do not consider the effect of delay.
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 | 0.002 | 0.013 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 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".