New Antenna Selection Schemes for Full-Duplex Cooperative MIMO-NOMA Systems
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this paper, we address the antenna selection (AS) problem in full-duplex (FD) cooperative non-orthogonal multiple access (NOMA) systems, where a multi-antenna FD relay bridges the connection between the multi-antenna base station and NOMA far user. Specifically, two AS schemes, namely max-U1 and max-U2, are proposed to maximize the end-to-end signal-to-interference-plus-noise ratio at either or both near and far users, respectively. Moreover, a two-stage AS scheme, namely quality-of-service (QoS) provisioning scheme, is designed to realize a specific rate at the far user while improving the near user’s rate. To enhance the performance of the QoS provisioning AS scheme, the idea of dynamic antenna clustering is applied at the relay to adaptively partition the relay’s antennas into transmit and receive subsets. The proposed AS schemes’ exact outage probability and achievable rate expressions are derived. To provide more insight, closed-form asymptotic outage probability expressions for the max-U1 and max-U2 AS schemes are obtained. Our results show that while the QoS provisioning AS scheme can deliver a near-optimal performance for static antenna setup at the relay, it provides up to 12% average sum rate gain over the optimum AS selection with fixed antenna setup.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".