MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Distributed Massive MIMO System with Dynamic Clustering in LEO Satellite Networks

2024· article· en· W4405490815 on OpenAlexaff
Khaled Humadi, Güneş Karabulut Kurt, Halim Yanıkömeroğlu

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSatellite Communication Systems
Canadian institutionsCarleton UniversityPolytechnique Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceMIMOCluster analysisSatelliteDistributed computingComputer networkArtificial intelligenceAerospace engineeringEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Distributed massive multiple-input multipleoutput (mMIMO) system for low Earth orbit (LEO) satellite networks is introduced as a promising technique to provide broadband connectivity. Nevertheless, several challenges persist in implementing distributed mMIMO systems for LEO satellite networks. These challenges include providing scalable massive access implementation as the system complexity increases with network size. Another challenging issue is the asynchronous arrival of signals at the user terminals due to the different propagation delays among distributed antennas in space, which destroys the coherent transmission, and consequently degrades the system performance. In this paper, we propose a scalable distributed mMIMO system for LEO satellite networks based on dynamic user-centric clustering. Aiming to obtain scalable implementation, new algorithms for initial cooperative access, cluster selection, and cluster handover are provided. In addition, phase shift-aware precoding is implemented to compensate for the propagation delay phase shifts. The performance of the proposed user-centric distributed mMIMO is compared with two baseline configurations: the non-cooperative transmission systems, where each user connects to only a single satellite, and the full-cooperative distributed mMIMO systems, where all satellites contribute serving each user. The numerical results show the potential of the proposed distributed mMIMO system to enhance system spectral efficiency when compared to noncooperative transmission systems. Additionally, it demonstrates the ability to minimize the serving cluster size for each user, thereby reducing the overall system complexity in comparison to the full-cooperative distributed mMIMO 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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.978
Threshold uncertainty score0.662

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.217
Teacher spread0.208 · 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
GenreEmpirical

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
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicSatellite Communication SystemsFrench-language works237,207