MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1998694399 · doi:10.1109/iccs.2014.7024879

A partial coherent detector for orthogonal modulations in two-way relay communications with physical network coding and fading

2014· article· en· W1998694399 on OpenAlexaff
Xiaobin Li, P. Ho

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicCooperative Communication and Network Coding
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDetectorFadingTelecommunications linkComputer scienceRelayBit error rateUpper and lower boundsAlgorithmElectronic engineeringCoding (social sciences)Decoding methodsInterference (communication)Topology (electrical circuits)Theoretical computer scienceTelecommunicationsMathematicsPhysicsEngineeringStatisticsChannel (broadcasting)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We present in this paper a partial coherent receiver for detecting (at the relay) the modulo-2 sum bit of the uplink orthogonal modulations in a two-way relay communication system with physical network coding and fading. The detector exploits the availability of implicit pilot symbols in every signaling interval of an orthogonal modulation and is able to provide reasonably accurate data recovery without the need of sending pilot symbols. Using the characteristic function approach, we were able to derive a tight analytical upper bound on the bit-error-rate (BER) of the detector. The first component in the upper bound tells us that when the uplink symbols from the two users are identical, the BER approaches that of conventional point-to-point coherent detection, i.e. the multiple-access interference arising from physical network coding has no effect on the BER when the two data bits are identical. On the other hand, the second component in the upper bound shows that when the data from the two users are different, the BER increases dramatically. In essence, the BER of the proposed partial coherent detector is the average of those of the coherent and non-coherent detectors. We also outline in the paper a simple technique for achieving full coherent detection at the relay without resorting to transmitting any pilot symbols.

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)0.002
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
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 head0.045
GPT teacher head0.310
Teacher spread0.266 · 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

Citations2
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicCooperative Communication and Network CodingFrench-language works237,207