MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3186046801 · doi:10.1109/twc.2021.3098900

Max-Min Fairness for Beamspace MIMO-NOMA: From Single-Beam to Multi-Beam

2021· article· en· W3186046801 on OpenAlexaff
Ruicheng Jiao, Linglong Dai, Wei Wang, Feng Lyu, Nan Cheng, Xuemin Shen

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Wireless Communications · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced Wireless Communication Technologies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
FundersNational Key Research and Development Program of ChinaNational Natural Science Foundation of ChinaEuropean Commission
KeywordsMIMONomaInterference (communication)Computer scienceSignal-to-noise ratio (imaging)Beam (structure)AlgorithmMathematicsTelecommunicationsTopology (electrical circuits)PhysicsCombinatoricsBeamformingTelecommunications linkOptics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

With the help of non-orthogonal multiple access (NOMA), the number of connections of the beamspace multiple-input multiple-output (MIMO) systems can be improved with enhanced sum-rate performance, which constitutes beamspace MIMO-NOMA. Thus, most relevant papers focus on improving the system sum rate, which may inflict unbearable rate loss to weak users. To ensure the achievable rates of weak users, we maximize and analyze the minimal rate of the system in the single-beam case as well as the multi-beam case, where two completely different phenomena are revealed. Particularly, in the single-beam case, the maximized minimal rate of the beamspace MIMO-NOMA always grows rapidly with the signal-to-noise-ratio (SNR), and is larger than that of the beamspace MIMO using orthogonal multiple access (beamspace MIMO-OMA). However, in the multi-beam case, the maximized minimal rate of the beamspace MIMO-NOMA grows slower and slower in the high-SNR region, where it is smaller than that of the beamspace MIMO-OMA. To explain this difference, it is disclosed that the intra-beam interference in the single-beam case is ofsuccessive pattern, which is proved to have no limit on the max-min rate. In contrast, the inter-beam interference in the multi-beam case is ofmutual pattern, which is proved to restrict the max-min rate to a derived upper bound.

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)0.010
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.018
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.052

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0100.018
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0030.003
Scholarly communication0.0040.004
Open science0.0040.003
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.277
Teacher spread0.233 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations46
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Wireless CommunicationsSame topicAdvanced Wireless Communication TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207