MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1557579859 · doi:10.1109/jlt.2015.2471087

Characteristics of Angular Precision and Dilution of Precision for Optical Wireless Positioning

2015· article· en· W1557579859 on OpenAlexafffund
Mark H. Bergen, Ahmed Arafa, Xian Jin, Richard Klukas, Jonathan F. Holzman

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Lightwave Technology · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicOptical Wireless Communication Technologies
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser UniversityOkanagan University CollegeUniversity of British Columbia, Okanagan CampusUniversity of British Columbia
FundersWestern Economic Diversification CanadaNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsDilution of precisionOptical wirelessBeaconWirelessAngle of arrivalOpticsOptical wireless communicationsAngular resolution (graph drawing)Field of viewPositioning systemComputer scienceStandard deviationPhysicsAcousticsMathematicsAntenna (radio)TelecommunicationsGlobal Positioning SystemStatisticsNode (physics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The challenges of optical wireless positioning are addressed in this paper by a thorough investigation of angle of arrival (AOA) positioning characteristics. The overall positioning precision for AOA positioning is studied in terms of two contributing factors-being angular precision and geometric dilution of precision (DOP). Angular precision is characterized for an optical wireless receiver having an especially wide angular field-of-view (FOV). Geometric DOP is characterized for optical beacons deployed in the form of triangle, square, and hexagon cell geometries. The mean and standard deviation of the positioning errors are extracted from the positioning error distributions for each of the three cell geometries. It is found that the overarching goal to establish low and uniform positioning error distributions can be met by implementing an optical wireless receiver with a wide angular FOV and by implementing the optical beacon geometry with a correspondingly small height-to-side-length ratio. The prospects of these findings are discussed for future optical wireless positioning systems.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.014
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.014
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.017
GPT teacher head0.254
Teacher spread0.237 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations12
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Lightwave TechnologySame topicOptical Wireless Communication TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207