A Deep Learning Framework for Beam Selection and Power Control in Massive MIMO - Millimeter-Wave Communications
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
A fine power control policy and beam alignment is required between the base station (BS) and user equipment (UE) to achieve the promising performance of massive multiple input multiple output (MIMO) in millimeter wave (mmWave) communications. However, obtaining the channel state information (CSI) of mmWave - massive MIMO systems is challenging. In this paper, the beam-steering technique is used to estimate the signal strength from the BS to the user. We propose a novel learning framework to determine the suitable beam for a specific user and the transmit power for minimizing the cost including the transmit power and the unsatisfied rate when the channel is unknown. In addition, we address the missing data problem, and then employ the long-short term memory (LSTM) on the temporal processed inputs to select the suitable beam. Furthermore, we design a learning agent to predict the proper transmit power from the transmitted SSBs taking into account the required transmission rate. We then validate the proposed learning framework on the Deep MIMO dataset constructed based on accurate ray-tracing channels. Numerical results show our proposed framework outperforms the state-of-the-art prediction strategies, and approximates the best performance which is obtained when the CSI is available.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 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