MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4200596779 · doi:10.3390/electronics10243061

Resource Allocation in NOMA-Assisted Ambient Backscatter Communication System

2021· article· en· W4200596779 on OpenAlexaff
Qiang Liu, Songlin Sun, Jijiang Hou, Hongbiao Jia, Michel Kadoch

Bibliographic record

VenueElectronics · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced Wireless Communication Technologies
Canadian institutionsÉcole de Technologie SupérieureUniversité du Québec à Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDecoding methodsBackscatter (email)Benchmark (surveying)NomaComputer scienceReflection (computer programming)Mathematical optimizationResource allocationOptimization problemComputational complexity theoryAlgorithmMathematicsTelecommunicationsWirelessTelecommunications linkComputer networkGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper considers a non-orthogonal multiple access (NOMA)-assisted ambient backscatter communication (AmBC) system. To maximize the achievable sum rate (ASR) of the AmBC system, a joint optimization problem over a backscatter device (BD) grouping strategy, reflection coefficients, and decoding order is formulated, where the BD grouping strategy contains the number of BD groups and the BD allocation strategy. The BD grouping strategy, the reflection coefficients, and the decoding order are all intertwined, and the global search is extremely complex. As a result, we propose a four-step optimization algorithm. First, we give the closed-form optimal solution of the BD decoding order and reflection coefficient for a given grouping strategy. Then, for a given number of BD groups, we propose a low-complexity BD allocation strategy based on the complexity–performance trade-off. Finally, the number of BD groups with the largest ASR is selected as the global optimal number of BD groups. The simulation results show that the proposed four-step optimization algorithm is better than the benchmark solution.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.379
Threshold uncertainty score0.590

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.221
Teacher spread0.211 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations7
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueElectronicsSame topicAdvanced Wireless Communication TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207