Beam Switching Based Beam Design for High-Speed Train mmWave Communications
Bibliographic record
Abstract
For high-speed train (HST) millimeter wave (mmWave) communications, the use of narrow beams with small beam coverage needs frequent beam switching, while wider beams with small beam gain leads to weaker mmWave signal strength. In this paper, we consider beam switching based beam design, which is formulated as an optimization problem aiming to minimize the number of switched beams within a predetermined railway range subject to that the receiving signal-to-noise ratio (RSNR) at the HST is no lower than a predetermined threshold. To solve this problem, we propose two sequential beam design schemes, both including two alternately-performed stages. In the first stage, given an updated beam coverage according to the railway range, we transform the problem into a feasibility problem and further convert it into a min-max optimization problem by relaxing the RSNR constraints into a penalty of the objective function. In the second stage, we evaluate the feasibility of the beamformer obtained from solving the min-max problem and determine the beam coverage accordingly. Simulation results show that compared to the first scheme, the second scheme can achieve 96.20% reduction in computational complexity at the cost of only 0.0657% performance degradation.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".