Pith. Sign in

RECORD

Performance Analysis of Underlay Cognitive Radio Systems: Estimation-Throughput Tradeoff

PaperPDF from arXiv

data files

Paper breakdownThe authors' claims, conditions and measurements, as JSON Signed receiptProof this review has not been altered
X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit Hacker News
Ankit Kaushik, Shree Krishna Sharma, Symeon Chatzinotas, Björn Ottersten, Friedrich K. Jondral

Information Theory · Submitted 12 Oct 2015

abstract compiled · 2026-09-23 · no language-model review

The authors' main claim Finally, we analyze an interesting tradeoff between the estimation time and the secondary throughput allowing an optimized performance of the US.

how it is stated · asserted 0.97 read the record →

Comment (0) Read on arXiv ↗
Cite ▾
arXiv ID1510.03353 (version 1)
Pith ID7FZOQGID, Pith's permanent record of this paper and its review
CitationAnkit Kaushik, Bj\"orn Ottersten, Friedrich K. Jondral, Shree Krishna Sharma, Symeon Chatzinotas. "Performance Analysis of Underlay Cognitive Radio Systems: Estimation-Throughput Tradeoff." arXiv:1510.03353 (2015). https://pith.science/paper/7FZOQGID
Claim paper

The compiled record

The paper's own sentences, arranged. Each label is drawn from a closed vocabulary; the number beside it is the probability the classifier gave that label. Numbers in the tables are the authors', checked by code. No sentence in this record was written by a model.

Open the compiled record

Compiled by classifier-1.13.0 via TypeSafe API, question bank abstract-p1-20260923, 2026-09-23: 1 request, 4,921 input tokens.

What the abstract itself states, as probabilities: claims first 0.08 · states limitation 0.23 · human participants 0.01 · controlled comparison 0.36 · randomized assignment 0.01 · states quantitative result 0.05 · compares with prior results 0.31 · mentions code or data availability 0.02.

The abstract, sentence by sentence

arXiv listing abstract v1. Results and the main claim are underlined; .

In this letter, we study the performance of cognitive Underlay Systems (USs) that employ power control mechanism at the Secondary Transmitter (ST). Existing baseline models considered for the performance analysis either assume the knowledge of involved channels at the ST or retrieve this information by means of a feedback channel, however, such situations hardly exist in practice. Motivated by this fact, we propose a novel approach that incorporates the estimation of the involved channels at the ST, in order to characterize the performance of USs under realistic scenarios. Moreover, we apply an outage constraint that captures the impact of imperfect channel knowledge, particularly on the interference power received at the primary receiver. Besides this, we employ a transmit power constraint at the ST to determine an operating regime for the US. Finally, we analyze an interesting tradeoff between the estimation time and the secondary throughput allowing an optimized performance of the US.

background contribution method result interpretation main claim

What the classifier reports for each sentence. The number is the probability it gave the label.
#sentencerolethe authors' own workstates the main conclusionstrength
s0 In this letter, we study the performance of cognitive Underlay Systems (USs) that employ power control mechanism at the Secondary Transmitter (ST). contribution 0.83 0.80 0.03 asserted 0.96
s1 Existing baseline models considered for the performance analysis either assume the knowledge of involved channels at the ST or retrieve this information by means of a feedback channel, however, such situations hardly exist in practice. gap 0.67 0.05 0.03 asserted 0.96
s2 Motivated by this fact, we propose a novel approach that incorporates the estimation of the involved channels at the ST, in order to characterize the performance of USs under realistic scenarios. contribution 0.96 0.87 0.09 asserted 0.98
s3 Moreover, we apply an outage constraint that captures the impact of imperfect channel knowledge, particularly on the interference power received at the primary receiver. method 0.91 0.88 0.06 asserted 0.99
s4 Besides this, we employ a transmit power constraint at the ST to determine an operating regime for the US. method 0.94 0.90 0.04 asserted 1.00
s5 Finally, we analyze an interesting tradeoff between the estimation time and the secondary throughput allowing an optimized performance of the US. contribution 0.81 0.93 0.51 asserted 0.97

What kind of paper the classifier reports this is: method or tool 0.51 · evidence from proof or derivation 0.94.

What was examined, and what was not

sources read
  • arXiv listing abstract v1
not examined
  • full text
  • figures and tables
  • references and citing sentences
  • relations to other papers
levels run
  • P abstract
not run
  • S sections
  • T body sentences
  • C citations
  • R cross-paper relations

Every quoted sentence on this record is the authors'. Every label is from Pith's closed vocabulary, with the probability shown beside it. Every number in the measurements table is the authors', checked by code. Record as JSON

The paper
Original abstract

In this letter, we study the performance of cognitive Underlay Systems (USs) that employ power control mechanism at the Secondary Transmitter (ST). Existing baseline models considered for the performance analysis either assume the knowledge of involved channels at the ST or retrieve this information by means of a feedback channel, however, such situations hardly exist in practice. Motivated by this fact, we propose a novel approach that incorporates the estimation of the involved channels at the ST, in order to characterize the performance of USs under realistic scenarios. Moreover, we apply an outage constraint that captures the impact of imperfect channel knowledge, particularly on the interference power received at the primary receiver. Besides this, we employ a transmit power constraint at the ST to determine an operating regime for the US. Finally, we analyze an interesting tradeoff between the estimation time and the secondary throughput allowing an optimized performance of the US.

Human review

How Pith checks papers → · Full audit of this paper →

How the literature uses it

What this paper does with the arXiv papers it cites

Each citing sentence is taken from the citing paper's LaTeX source and typed by Pith's classifier. A label appears at probability 0.8 or more (0.95 for support), a contest at 0.7 or more; the quoted words are the citing authors'. How each label was checked · JSON

Papers whose main result relates to this one's

Found among the papers closest to this one by title and main claim. Pith's classifier compared each pair's main results and a second model family confirmed the relation; checked against two further families, shown conflicts agreed 118 times in 120 and shown same results 218 times in 239. The quoted sentence is the other paper's main claim.

States the same result 1 paper

What it cites

Cites as background 1 paper

Discussion

Know something about this paper? Leave a comment, or highlight any passage above to comment on it.