MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Diversity Gain and Outage Probability for MIMO Free-Space Optical Links with Misalignment

2011· article· en· W1985952244 on OpenAlexaff
Ahmed A. Farid, Steve Hranilovic

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Communications · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicOptical Wireless Communication Technologies
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFadingDiversity gainMIMOFading distributionSignal-to-noise ratio (imaging)Diversity combiningChannel (broadcasting)Maximal-ratio combiningElectronic engineeringChannel state informationComputer scienceTransmitterTelecommunicationsWirelessEngineeringRayleigh fading

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A novel statistical channel model for multiple-input multiple-output (MIMO) free-space optical (FSO) communication systems impaired by atmospheric and misalignment fading is developed. A slow-fading channel model is considered and the outage probability is derived as a performance measure. The diversity gain defined as the signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) exponent at high SNR is analyzed. Interestingly in the presence of misalignment fading the diversity gain depends only on the misalignment variance and is independent of the number of transmitters M and receivers N. Increasing the number of transmitters and receivers only results in a lower probability of outage for a given SNR, however, the rate of change is unaffected. Contrary to this case, the diversity gain of MIMO FSO systems in the presence of atmospheric fading and no misalignment is shown to be proportional to the number of transmitters and receivers, in particular the product MN.

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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.059
GPT teacher head0.236
Teacher spread0.177 · 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

Citations119
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on CommunicationsSame topicOptical Wireless Communication TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207