MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1916421455 · doi:10.1109/aps.2015.7305283

Experimental analysis of human body effects on NLOS 60 GHz propagation channel

2015· article· en· W1916421455 on OpenAlexaff
M. Ghaddar, Mourad Nedil, Larbi Talbi, J. LeBel

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMillimeter-Wave Propagation and Modeling
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec en OutaouaisUniversité du Québec
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNon-line-of-sight propagationPath lossFadingChannel (broadcasting)Channel soundingIntersection (aeronautics)Radio propagationDelay spreadAcousticsComputer scienceRadio propagation modelTelecommunicationsElectronic engineeringPhysicsEngineeringMIMOWirelessAerospace engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Reported are the results of an experimental investigation of human body scattering effects on non-line-of-sight (NLOS) 60 GHz broadband propagation channel. Based on sweeping-frequency sounding technique (59.6 - 60.6 GHz), an indoor propagation measurement campaign is carried out in a typical L-shaped intersection of two corridors, each with a length of 10 m. Thus, with and without the presence of a person at the corridors intersection, the channel's statistical propagation characteristics are extracted and analyzed. The channel's performance is investigated in terms of RMS delays, path loss and Ricean K-factor fading distributions. The experimental results show that NLOS mm-wave propagation characteristics are very hostile where a severe path loss is recorded in the NLOS corridors under consideration. Moreover, unlike line-of-sight (LOS) channel, the presence of person in the considered channel enhances NLOS propagation characteristics and thus, provides a better signal coverage.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.274
Threshold uncertainty score0.387

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 communication0.0000.000
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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.273
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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations3
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicMillimeter-Wave Propagation and ModelingFrench-language works237,207