MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1806490096 · doi:10.5815/ijieeb.2015.05.03

Spectrum Sensing for Cognitive Radio Using Hybrid Matched Filter Single Cycle Cyclostationary Feature Detector

2015· article· en· W1806490096 on OpenAlexaff
Divya Joshi, Neeru Sharma, Jaskirat Singh

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Information Engineering and Electronic Business · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicCognitive Radio Networks and Spectrum Sensing
Canadian institutionsLakehead University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCyclostationary processCognitive radioComputer scienceFalse alarmDetectorMatched filterFrequency offsetMultipath propagationOffset (computer science)Filter (signal processing)Electronic engineeringReal-time computingTelecommunicationsArtificial intelligenceWirelessOrthogonal frequency-division multiplexingComputer visionEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Spectrum sensing is an important task in cognitive radio (CR). Matched filter technique one of the techniques employed for spectrum sensing in cognitive radio which faces the challenge of low frequency offset tolerance in very low SNR environments. Hybrid matched filter architecture is used to improve this frequency offset tolerance. But, overall even such kind of architecture results in coarse detection. In very low SNR environments, where primary user is highly mobile, the multipath profile results in unknown phase of signal. Such kind of signal cannot even be detected by Hybrid Matched Filter. In this paper we propose combination of Hybrid Matched Filter and Single Cycle Cyclostationary Feature Detector to enhance the detection of such architecture. This results in both high frequency offset tolerance as well as fine detection of signal with unknown phase in very low SNR environments. Simulation results show significant improvement in the probability of detection and false alarm of the proposed scheme over Hybrid Matched Filter.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.774
Threshold uncertainty score0.595

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.002
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.214
Teacher spread0.205 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations5
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Information Engineering and Electronic BusinessSame topicCognitive Radio Networks and Spectrum SensingFrench-language works237,207