Quick Navigation
Topics
Trapped Ion Quantum Computing
Quantum Annealing for Active User Detection in NOMA Systems
arXiv
Authors: Romain Piron, Claire Goursaud
Year
2024
Paper ID
36994
Status
Preprint
Abstract Read
~2 min
Abstract Words
114
Citations
N/A
Abstract
Detecting active users in a non-orthogonal multiple access (NOMA) network poses a significant challenge for 5G/6G applications. Traditional algorithms tackling this task, relying on classical processors, have to make a compromise between performance and complexity. However, a quantum computing based strategy called quantum annealing (QA) can mitigate this trade-off. In this paper, we first propose a mapping between the AUD searching problem and the identification of the ground state of an Ising Hamiltonian. Then, we compare the execution times of our QA approach for several code domain multiple access (CDMA) scenarios. We evaluate the impact of the cross-correlation properties of the chosen codes in a NOMA network for detecting the active user's set.
Why This Paper Matters
- This paper contributes to the Trapped-Ion Quantum Computing research area in the Quantum Articles archive.
- It adds a 2024 reference point for readers tracking recent quantum research.
- Detecting active users in a non-orthogonal multiple access (NOMA) network poses a significant challenge for 5G/6G applications.
Paper Tools
Become a member to use research tools
Sign in to open papers, visit source links, share, cite, compare, copy DOI links, request category corrections, and build your reading list.
Show Paper arXiv Publisher Share
Cite This Paper
Copy URL
Compare
Copy DOI Add to Reading List
Category Correction Request
Category Correction Request
Help us improve classification quality by proposing a better category. Every request is reviewed by an admin.
Sign in to submit a category correction request for this paper.
Log In to SubmitReferences & Citation Signals
Community Reactions
Quick sentiment from readers on this paper.
Score:
0
Likes: 0
Dislikes: 0
Sign in to react to this paper.
Discussion & Reviews (Moderated)
Average Rating: 0.0 / 5 (0 ratings)
No written reviews yet.