Joint Relay Selection, Full-Duplex and Device-to-Device Transmission in Wireless Powered NOMA Networks
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper investigates non-orthogonal multiple access (NOMA), cooperative relaying, and energy harvesting to support device-to-device (D2D) transmission. In particular, we deploy multiple relay nodes and a cell-center D2D device which can operate in full-duplex (FD) or half-duplex (HD) mode to communicate with a cell-edge D2D device. In this context, there are two possible signal transmission paths from the base station (BS) to the far D2D user either through multiple decode-and-forward (DF) relay nodes or through a near D2D user. Consequently, we propose three schemes to support D2D-NOMA systems, namely non-energy harvesting relaying (Non-EHR), energy harvesting relaying (EHR) and quantize-map-forward relaying (QMFR) schemes. For each of the proposed schemes, closed-form expressions of the outage probabilities of both D2D users are derived. Extensive Monte-Carlo simulation results are provided to validate the derived analytical expressions. The study results show that the proposed schemes can improve the outage performance compared to conventional orthogonal multiple access (OMA) schemes. Moreover, it is shown that the Non-EHR scheme achieves the best outage performance among the three considered 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 | 0.001 |
| 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".