Power-Efficient Optimization for Coexisting Semantic and Bit-Based Users in NOMA Networks
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Semantic communications, which focus on transmitting the semantic meaning of data, have been proposed as a novel paradigm for achieving efficient and relevant communication. Meanwhile, non-orthogonal multiple access (NOMA) enhances spectral efficiency by allowing multiple users to share the same spectrum. However, semantic communications are unlikely to fully replace conventional bit-level communications in the near future, as the latter remain dominant. Therefore, integrating semantic users into a NOMA network alongside conventional bit-based users becomes a meaningful approach to improve both transmission and spectrum efficiency. Nonetheless, due to the lack of a mathematical model that accurately characterizes the relationship between the performance of semantic transceivers and wireless resource allocation, enhancing performance through resource optimization remains a challenge. Moreover, successive interference cancellation (SIC), a key technique in NOMA, introduces additional complexity in system design and implementation. To address these challenges, this paper first improves the deep semantic communication (DeepSC) transceiver to make it adaptive to varying wireless transmission conditions. Subsequently, a data-driven regression approach is employed to develop a mathematical model that captures the impact of wireless resources on semantic transceiver performance. In parallel, a multi-cluster hybrid NOMA (H-NOMA) framework is proposed, where each cluster consists of one semantic user and one bit-based user, to mitigate the complexity introduced by SIC. A total transmit power minimization problem is then formulated by jointly optimizing the beamforming design, bandwidth allocation, and semantic symbol factor. The formulated problem is non-convex and challenging to solve directly. To tackle this, a closed-form optimal solution for the beamforming vectors is first derived. Then, a block coordinate descent (BCD)-based algorithm is developed to determine the bandwidth allocation, while an exhaustive search method is used to optimize the semantic symbol factor. Simulation results illustrate the advantages of the semantic communication over the conventional bit-level communication and verify the superior performance of the proposed framework compared with existing benchmark schemes.
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 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 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".