MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1978489006 · doi:10.1002/ett.1210

Cohen–Merhav bounds on the symbol error rate of uncoded signalling in AWGN interference

2007· article· en· W1978489006 on OpenAlexafffund
Shahram Yousefi, B. Holmes

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Transactions on Telecommunications · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced Wireless Communication Techniques
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsAdditive white Gaussian noiseAlgorithmMathematicsUpper and lower boundsComputer scienceBounding overwatchChannel (broadcasting)Interference (communication)Range (aeronautics)SignallingBernoulli's principleStatisticsTelecommunicationsArtificial intelligenceEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Using a recent Bonferroni‐type inequality proposed by Cohen and Merhav, we develop new tight lower bounds on the word error probability of uncoded systems with optimal Maximum A Posteriori (MAP) coherent detection for non‐uniform signalling over additive white Gaussian noise channel. Our results are compared to the state‐of‐the‐art Kuai‐Alajaji‐Takahara (KAT) lower bounds and it is shown that the superiority of one bound to another is dependent on the signal constellation, the amount of non‐uniformity of the Bernoulli source to be communicated and the SNR range of interest. It is noted that bounding techniques for the performance evaluation of communication systems are receiving increasing attention today, thanks to their suitability for a wide variety of schemes ranging from uncoded signalling to space–time‐coded multiple‐input multiple‐output (MIMO) systems. Copyright © 2007 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

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)0.014
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.065
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.075

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0140.065
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.004
Scholarly communication0.0040.005
Open science0.0030.005
Research integrity0.0020.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.266
Teacher spread0.235 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations0
Published2007
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEuropean Transactions on TelecommunicationsSame topicAdvanced Wireless Communication TechniquesFrench-language works237,207