Achievable rate region for a hub-remote three-terminal satellite network

Achievable rate region for a hub-remote three-terminal satellite network

We study the performance of amplify-forward (AF) protocols in a three-terminal hub-remote satellite exchange channel, which is an extension of the two-way relay channel. We want to answer two questions: 1) Can non-orthogonal signaling and partial interference cancellation bring as much improvement a...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Hauptverfasser: Xu, Chenguang, Wilson, Stephen G.
Format: Tagungsbericht
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Decoding
Information rates
Interference cancellation
Noise
Protocols
Relays
Satellites
Online-Zugang:Volltext bestellen
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 4514
container_issue
container_start_page 4509
container_title
container_volume
creator Xu, Chenguang
Wilson, Stephen G.
description We study the performance of amplify-forward (AF) protocols in a three-terminal hub-remote satellite exchange channel, which is an extension of the two-way relay channel. We want to answer two questions: 1) Can non-orthogonal signaling and partial interference cancellation bring as much improvement as what have seen in the two-way relay channel? 2) Which decoding method achieves the largest achievable rate region? Theoretical analysis and numerical plots show that for the three-flow case, three-user simultaneous signalling outperforms a time-shared AF protocol, while for the four-flow case, three-user simultaneous signalling only shows advantage when the hub terminal has much higher SNR than remote terminals.
doi_str_mv 10.1109/ICC.2013.6655278
format Conference Proceeding
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>ieee_6IE</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_ieee_primary_6655278</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><ieee_id>6655278</ieee_id><sourcerecordid>6655278</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-i241t-1c901e00d7db81f1aa4c9cbcf735c842661795acc225bfe1ef6bd25a677e0663</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNotUE1LAzEUjKJgqXsXvOwfSJuXbD72WBa1hYKX3kuSfXGj-yHZVfHfG7CXmWHm8RiGkAdgGwBWbw9Ns-EMxEYpKbk2V6SotYFKaSGAc31NVlALQ8EYcZO1lIwKxfQdKeb5nTEGWikhqxXZ73wX8du6Hstklwz4FqexDFMqbdl9OZpwmLK_dAmRLpiGONq-nPNt38ccjLj8TOnjntwG289YXHhNTs9Pp2ZPj68vh2Z3pJFXsFDwNQNkrNWtMxDA2srX3vmghfSm4kqBrqX1nnPpAgIG5VourdIaWe68Jo__byMinj9THGz6PV9mEH_mxU7q</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Publisher</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>conference_proceeding</recordtype></control><display><type>conference_proceeding</type><title>Achievable rate region for a hub-remote three-terminal satellite network</title><source>IEEE Electronic Library (IEL) Conference Proceedings</source><creator>Xu, Chenguang ; Wilson, Stephen G.</creator><creatorcontrib>Xu, Chenguang ; Wilson, Stephen G.</creatorcontrib><description>We study the performance of amplify-forward (AF) protocols in a three-terminal hub-remote satellite exchange channel, which is an extension of the two-way relay channel. We want to answer two questions: 1) Can non-orthogonal signaling and partial interference cancellation bring as much improvement as what have seen in the two-way relay channel? 2) Which decoding method achieves the largest achievable rate region? Theoretical analysis and numerical plots show that for the three-flow case, three-user simultaneous signalling outperforms a time-shared AF protocol, while for the four-flow case, three-user simultaneous signalling only shows advantage when the hub terminal has much higher SNR than remote terminals.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1550-3607</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1938-1883</identifier><identifier>EISBN: 9781467331227</identifier><identifier>EISBN: 1467331228</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1109/ICC.2013.6655278</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>IEEE</publisher><subject>Decoding ; Information rates ; Interference cancellation ; Noise ; Protocols ; Relays ; Satellites</subject><ispartof>2013 IEEE International Conference on Communications (ICC), 2013, p.4509-4514</ispartof><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/6655278$$EHTML$$P50$$Gieee$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>309,310,776,780,785,786,2052,27902,54895</link.rule.ids><linktorsrc>$$Uhttps://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/6655278$$EView_record_in_IEEE$$FView_record_in_$$GIEEE</linktorsrc></links><search><creatorcontrib>Xu, Chenguang</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Wilson, Stephen G.</creatorcontrib><title>Achievable rate region for a hub-remote three-terminal satellite network</title><title>2013 IEEE International Conference on Communications (ICC)</title><addtitle>ICC</addtitle><description>We study the performance of amplify-forward (AF) protocols in a three-terminal hub-remote satellite exchange channel, which is an extension of the two-way relay channel. We want to answer two questions: 1) Can non-orthogonal signaling and partial interference cancellation bring as much improvement as what have seen in the two-way relay channel? 2) Which decoding method achieves the largest achievable rate region? Theoretical analysis and numerical plots show that for the three-flow case, three-user simultaneous signalling outperforms a time-shared AF protocol, while for the four-flow case, three-user simultaneous signalling only shows advantage when the hub terminal has much higher SNR than remote terminals.</description><subject>Decoding</subject><subject>Information rates</subject><subject>Interference cancellation</subject><subject>Noise</subject><subject>Protocols</subject><subject>Relays</subject><subject>Satellites</subject><issn>1550-3607</issn><issn>1938-1883</issn><isbn>9781467331227</isbn><isbn>1467331228</isbn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>conference_proceeding</rsrctype><creationdate>2013</creationdate><recordtype>conference_proceeding</recordtype><sourceid>6IE</sourceid><sourceid>RIE</sourceid><recordid>eNotUE1LAzEUjKJgqXsXvOwfSJuXbD72WBa1hYKX3kuSfXGj-yHZVfHfG7CXmWHm8RiGkAdgGwBWbw9Ns-EMxEYpKbk2V6SotYFKaSGAc31NVlALQ8EYcZO1lIwKxfQdKeb5nTEGWikhqxXZ73wX8du6Hstklwz4FqexDFMqbdl9OZpwmLK_dAmRLpiGONq-nPNt38ccjLj8TOnjntwG289YXHhNTs9Pp2ZPj68vh2Z3pJFXsFDwNQNkrNWtMxDA2srX3vmghfSm4kqBrqX1nnPpAgIG5VourdIaWe68Jo__byMinj9THGz6PV9mEH_mxU7q</recordid><startdate>201306</startdate><enddate>201306</enddate><creator>Xu, Chenguang</creator><creator>Wilson, Stephen G.</creator><general>IEEE</general><scope>6IE</scope><scope>6IH</scope><scope>CBEJK</scope><scope>RIE</scope><scope>RIO</scope></search><sort><creationdate>201306</creationdate><title>Achievable rate region for a hub-remote three-terminal satellite network</title><author>Xu, Chenguang ; Wilson, Stephen G.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-i241t-1c901e00d7db81f1aa4c9cbcf735c842661795acc225bfe1ef6bd25a677e0663</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>conference_proceedings</rsrctype><prefilter>conference_proceedings</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2013</creationdate><topic>Decoding</topic><topic>Information rates</topic><topic>Interference cancellation</topic><topic>Noise</topic><topic>Protocols</topic><topic>Relays</topic><topic>Satellites</topic><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Xu, Chenguang</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Wilson, Stephen G.</creatorcontrib><collection>IEEE Electronic Library (IEL) Conference Proceedings</collection><collection>IEEE Proceedings Order Plan (POP) 1998-present by volume</collection><collection>IEEE Xplore All Conference Proceedings</collection><collection>IEEE Electronic Library (IEL)</collection><collection>IEEE Proceedings Order Plans (POP) 1998-present</collection></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext_linktorsrc</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Xu, Chenguang</au><au>Wilson, Stephen G.</au><format>book</format><genre>proceeding</genre><ristype>CONF</ristype><atitle>Achievable rate region for a hub-remote three-terminal satellite network</atitle><btitle>2013 IEEE International Conference on Communications (ICC)</btitle><stitle>ICC</stitle><date>2013-06</date><risdate>2013</risdate><spage>4509</spage><epage>4514</epage><pages>4509-4514</pages><issn>1550-3607</issn><eissn>1938-1883</eissn><eisbn>9781467331227</eisbn><eisbn>1467331228</eisbn><abstract>We study the performance of amplify-forward (AF) protocols in a three-terminal hub-remote satellite exchange channel, which is an extension of the two-way relay channel. We want to answer two questions: 1) Can non-orthogonal signaling and partial interference cancellation bring as much improvement as what have seen in the two-way relay channel? 2) Which decoding method achieves the largest achievable rate region? Theoretical analysis and numerical plots show that for the three-flow case, three-user simultaneous signalling outperforms a time-shared AF protocol, while for the four-flow case, three-user simultaneous signalling only shows advantage when the hub terminal has much higher SNR than remote terminals.</abstract><pub>IEEE</pub><doi>10.1109/ICC.2013.6655278</doi><tpages>6</tpages></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext_linktorsrc
identifier ISSN: 1550-3607
ispartof 2013 IEEE International Conference on Communications (ICC), 2013, p.4509-4514
issn 1550-3607
1938-1883
language eng
recordid cdi_ieee_primary_6655278
source IEEE Electronic Library (IEL) Conference Proceedings
subjects Decoding
Information rates
Interference cancellation
Noise
Protocols
Relays
Satellites
title Achievable rate region for a hub-remote three-terminal satellite network
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-01T16%3A19%3A51IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-ieee_6IE&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=proceeding&rft.atitle=Achievable%20rate%20region%20for%20a%20hub-remote%20three-terminal%20satellite%20network&rft.btitle=2013%20IEEE%20International%20Conference%20on%20Communications%20(ICC)&rft.au=Xu,%20Chenguang&rft.date=2013-06&rft.spage=4509&rft.epage=4514&rft.pages=4509-4514&rft.issn=1550-3607&rft.eissn=1938-1883&rft_id=info:doi/10.1109/ICC.2013.6655278&rft_dat=%3Cieee_6IE%3E6655278%3C/ieee_6IE%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&rft.eisbn=9781467331227&rft.eisbn_list=1467331228&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_id=info:pmid/&rft_ieee_id=6655278&rfr_iscdi=true