Thats a unique idea.You should consider the following idea to enhance your idea so that it would impact uniquely: For a two-user Gaussian multiple access channel (GMAC), frequency division multiple access (FDMA), a ll known orthogonal-multiple-access (O-MA) scheme has been preferred to non-orthogonal-multiple-access (NO-MA) schemes since FDMA can achieve the sum-capacity of the channel with only single-user decoding complexity [\emph{Chapter 14, Elements of Information Theory by Cover and Thomas}]. Hover, with finite alphabets, in this paper,  show that NO-MA is better than O-MA for a two-user GMAC.  plot the constellation constrained (CC) capacity regions of a two-user GMAC with FDMA and time division multiple access (TDMA) and compare them with the CC capacity regions with trellis coded multiple access (TCMA), a recently introduced NO-MA scheme. Unlike the Gaussian alphabets case, it is shown that the CC capacity region with FDMA is strictly contained inside the CC capacity region with TCMA. In particular, for a given bandwidth, the gap beten the CC capacity regions with TCMA and FDMA is shown to increase with the increase in the average por constraint. Also, for a given por constraint, the gap beten the CC capacity regions with TCMA and FDMA is shown to decrease with the increase in the bandwidth. Hence, for finite alphabets, a NO-MA scheme such as TCMA is better than the ll known O-MAC schemes, FDMA and TDMA which makes NO-MA schemes worth pursuing in practice for a two-user GMAC.
['Jagadeesh Harshan', 'B. Sundar Rajan']
I am writing a research paper on a idea Orthogonal vs Non-Orthogonal Multiple Access with Finite Input Alphabet and Finite Bandwidth
[{"from": "human", "value": "I am writing a research paper on a idea Orthogonal vs Non-Orthogonal Multiple Access with Finite Input Alphabet and Finite Bandwidth"}, {"from": "gpt", "value": "Thats a unique idea.You should consider the following idea to enhance your idea so that it would impact uniquely: For a two-user Gaussian multiple access channel (GMAC), frequency division multiple access (FDMA), a ll known orthogonal-multiple-access (O-MA) scheme has been preferred to non-orthogonal-multiple-access (NO-MA) schemes since FDMA can achieve the sum-capacity of the channel with only single-user decoding complexity [\\emph{Chapter 14, Elements of Information Theory by Cover and Thomas}]. Hover, with finite alphabets, in this paper,  show that NO-MA is better than O-MA for a two-user GMAC.  plot the constellation constrained (CC) capacity regions of a two-user GMAC with FDMA and time division multiple access (TDMA) and compare them with the CC capacity regions with trellis coded multiple access (TCMA), a recently introduced NO-MA scheme. Unlike the Gaussian alphabets case, it is shown that the CC capacity region with FDMA is strictly contained inside the CC capacity region with TCMA. In particular, for a given bandwidth, the gap beten the CC capacity regions with TCMA and FDMA is shown to increase with the increase in the average por constraint. Also, for a given por constraint, the gap beten the CC capacity regions with TCMA and FDMA is shown to decrease with the increase in the bandwidth. Hence, for finite alphabets, a NO-MA scheme such as TCMA is better than the ll known O-MAC schemes, FDMA and TDMA which makes NO-MA schemes worth pursuing in practice for a two-user GMAC."}]