检索规则说明:AND代表“并且”;OR代表“或者”;NOT代表“不包含”;(注意必须大写,运算符两边需空一格)
检 索 范 例 :范例一: (K=图书馆学 OR K=情报学) AND A=范并思 范例二:J=计算机应用与软件 AND (U=C++ OR U=Basic) NOT M=Visual
作 者:刘少阳[1] 习勇[1] 李颖 魏急波[1] ALISTER Burr
机构地区:[1]国防科学技术大学电子科学与工程学院,湖南长沙410073 [2]中国电子系统工程公司研究所,北京100141 [3]Department of Electronics,York University,Heslington
出 处:《通信学报》2012年第9期132-139,共8页Journal on Communications
摘 要:针对AF(amplify-and-forward)和DF(decode-and-forward)2种转发模式,分析了分组协同中继通信系统在高信噪比下的误帧率性能,并研究了帧长对误帧率的影响。研究表明,以误帧率为准则,AF和DF模式都取得了相同的分集增益,但是编码增益不一样,并且编码增益与帧长有关。与现有的研究结论不一样,考虑到实际的分组长度,DF总是能够获得较AF更好的性能,帧越短DF的优势越明显;当帧长足够大时AF能够获得和DF相近的性能。还研究了最优的中继位置,对于AF系统,最优的中继位置总是位于源和目的节点中点处;而对于DF系统,当帧长增大时最优的中继位置将从靠近源处逐渐移至中点处。The packet error rate(PER) of the packet cooperative relay system for both(amplify-and-forward) and DF(decode-and-forward) schemes in the high signal-to-noise ratio(SNR) region was analyzed,and the effect of packet length on PER performance was studied.It is shown that both AF and DF achieve the same diversity gain in terms of PER,but with different coding gains depending on packet length.Different from the prior research,if considering practi-cal packet lengths,the DF scheme always achieves better performance than the AF scheme,with shorter packet length,the advantage of DF over AF is more obvious.For large enough packet length,AF performance approaches that of DF.It is also found that the optimal relay will always be located in the middle of the two nodes for AF regardless of packet length,while for DF,when packet length becomes large,the optimal relay moves from close to the source towards the midpoint.
分 类 号:TP393.17[自动化与计算机技术—计算机应用技术]
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在链接到云南高校图书馆文献保障联盟下载...
云南高校图书馆联盟文献共享服务平台 版权所有©
您的IP:216.73.216.15