Novel Outer Bounds and Capacity Results for the Interference Channel\n with Conferencing Receivers
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this paper, capacity bounds for the two-user Interference Channel (IC)\nwith cooperative receivers via conferencing links of finite capacities is\ninvestigated. The capacity results known for this communication scenario are\nlimited to a very few special cases of the one-sided IC. One of the major\nchallenges in analyzing such cooperative networks is how to establish efficient\ncapacity outer bounds for them. In this paper, by applying new techniques,\nnovel capacity outer bounds are presented for the ICs with conferencing users.\nUsing the outer bounds, several new capacity results are proved for interesting\nchannels with unidirectional cooperation in strong and mixed interference\nregimes. A fact is that the conferencing link (between receivers) may be\nutilized to provide one receiver with information about its corresponding\nsignal or its non-corresponding signal (interference signal). As a remarkable\nconsequence, it is demonstrated that both strategies can be helpful to achieve\nthe capacity of the channel. Finally, for the case of Gaussian IC, it is\nmathematically shown that our outer bound is strictly tighter than the previous\none derived by Wang and Tse.\n
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 | 0.004 | 0.024 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.001 |
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.
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".