Fast Beam Alignment via Pure Exploration in Multi-Armed Bandits
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
The beam alignment (BA) problem consists in accurately aligning the transmitter and receiver beams to establish a reliable communication link in wireless communication systems. Existing BA methods search the entire beam space to identify the optimal transmit-receive beam pair. This incurs a significant latency when the number of antennas is large. In this work, we develop a bandit-based fast BA algorithm to reduce BA latency for millimeter-wave (mmWave) communications. Our algorithm is named Two-Phase Heteroscedastic Track-and-Stop (2PHT&S). We first formulate the BA problem as a pure exploration problem in multi-armed bandits in which the objective is to minimize the required number of time steps given a certain fixed confidence level. By taking advantage of the correlation structure among beams that the information from nearby beams is similar and the heteroscedastic property that the variance of the reward of an arm (beam) is related to its mean, the proposed algorithm groups all beams into several beam sets such that the optimal beam set is first selected and the optimal beam is identified in this set after that. Theoretical analysis and simulation results on synthetic and semi-practical channel data demonstrate the clear superiority of the proposed algorithm vis-à-vis other baseline competitors.
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