MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Active IRS Design for RSMA-based Downlink URLLC Transmission

2023· article· en· W4376480699 on OpenAlexafffund
Mostafa Darabi, Walid R. Ghanem, Vahid Jamali, Lutz Lampe, Robert Schober

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced Wireless Communication Technologies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsComputer scienceTelecommunications linkComputer networkBase stationBottleneckRobustness (evolution)Quality of serviceDistributed computingEmbedded system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Rate-splitting multiple access (RSMA) has been proposed as a flexible multiple access scheme for improving interference management in sixth-generation (6G) networks. In particular, the low latency facilitated by RSMA and its robustness against user mobility and imperfect channel state information make it an ideal candidate for the ultra-reliable and low-latency (URLLC) use case in 6G networks. However, since the common message in RSMA needs to be decoded by all the users, the achievable rate of the common message is determined by the user with the poorest channel quality. To overcome this bottleneck, an active intelligent reflecting surface (IRS) can be deployed to enhance the achievable rate of the common stream. However, this comes at the expense of additional power consumption due to the active IRS. In this paper, we consider an active IRS-aided RSMA-based downlink URLLC system and study the resource allocation design for minimization of the power consumption of the base station and the active IRS under quality-of-service constraints for the URLLC users. Our simulation results reveal that active IRSs yield a lower overall power consumption and require a smaller surface size compared to passive IRSs in RSMA-based URLLC systems. Moreover, we show that active IRS-aided RSMA systems consume less power than active IRS-aided space division multiple access (SDMA) systems.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.763
Threshold uncertainty score0.383

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.044
GPT teacher head0.272
Teacher spread0.229 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAdvanced Wireless Communication TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207