MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1980287044 · doi:10.1109/tap.2013.2279094

Application of Polynomial Chaos to Quantify Uncertainty in Deterministic Channel Models

2013· article· en· W1980287044 on OpenAlexaff
Andrew C. M. Austin, Neeraj Sood, Joseph Siu, Costas D. Sarris

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Antennas and Propagation · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicProbabilistic and Robust Engineering Design
Canadian institutionsThales (Canada)University of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPolynomial chaosRandomnessMonte Carlo methodChannel (broadcasting)AlgorithmPolynomialRay tracing (physics)Radio channelUncertainty quantificationComputer scienceApplied mathematicsStatistical physicsFinite-difference time-domain methodMathematicsMathematical optimizationMathematical analysisTelecommunicationsStatisticsPhysicsOptics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A non-intrusive formulation of the polynomial chaos method is applied to quantify the uncertainties in deterministic models of the indoor radio channel. Deterministic models based on the finite-difference time-domain (FDTD) method and ray tracing are examined. Various sources of parameter uncertainty are considered, including randomness in the material properties, building geometry, and the spatial location of transmitting and receiving antennas. The polynomial chaos results are confirmed against Monte Carlo simulations and experimental measurements. The analysis shows the expected variation in the sector-averaged path loss can be considerable for relatively small input parameter uncertainties, leading to the conclusion that a single simulation run using `nominal values' may be insufficient to adequately characterize the indoor radio channel.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.064
GPT teacher head0.303
Teacher spread0.239 · 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
GenreMethods

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

Citations57
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Antennas and PropagationSame topicProbabilistic and Robust Engineering DesignFrench-language works237,207