MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3188167219 · doi:10.1109/icc42927.2021.9500475

Underlay Cognitive Network-Coded Cooperation over Nakagami-m Fading Channels

2021· article· en· W3188167219 on OpenAlexaff
Ali Reza Heidarpour, Masoud Ardakani, Chintha Tellambura

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicCooperative Communication and Network Coding
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNakagami distributionFadingLinear network codingTransmitterUnderlayCognitive radioComputer scienceRelayTopology (electrical circuits)Computer networkInterference (communication)TelecommunicationsDecoding methodsSignal-to-noise ratio (imaging)MathematicsPower (physics)Channel (broadcasting)WirelessPhysicsCombinatorics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper investigates the performance of a network-coded cooperative (NCC) system in an underlay cognitive radio network (CRN). The primary network (PN) consists of a single transmitter-receiver pair, while the secondary network (SN) is composed of N sources, a single destination, and M decode-and-forward (DF) relays, employing network coding (NC) over non-binary Galois field. For the SN, a closed-form expression and an asymptotically tight end-to-end (E2E) outage probability (OP) are derived and the diversity order is quantified. Compared to the existing literature, the proposed CRN NCC has four main distinguishable features: i) it is applicable to general CRN NCC network settings with arbitrary number of sources and relays; ii) it considers general relay selection and independent and non-identically distributed (i.n.i.d.) Nakagami-m fading channels; iii) it accounts for maximum transmit power at the SN and assumes secondary-to-primary (S2P) and primary-to-secondary (P2S) interference links; and iv) it provides a generalization of previous works and includes existing results in the literature as special cases. Simulation results are further provided to confirm the correctness of our analysis.

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)0.005
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.019

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
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 head0.048
GPT teacher head0.295
Teacher spread0.247 · 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

Citations2
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicCooperative Communication and Network CodingFrench-language works237,207