MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2010867273 · doi:10.1109/tvt.2012.2197769

Cooperative Spectrum Sensing in Cognitive Radio Networks With Noncoherent Transmission

2012· article· en· W2010867273 on OpenAlexaff
Simin Bokharaiee, Ha H. Nguyen, E. Shwedyk

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Vehicular Technology · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicCognitive Radio Networks and Spectrum Sensing
Canadian institutionsUniversity of SaskatchewanUniversity of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCognitive radioTransmission (telecommunications)Decoding methodsComputer scienceFusion rulesKeyingElectronic engineeringThroughputEnergy (signal processing)Fusion centerFrequency-shift keyingSignal-to-noise ratio (imaging)Binary numberChannel (broadcasting)FadingTelecommunicationsAlgorithmEngineeringWirelessMathematicsArtificial intelligenceStatisticsDemodulation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The problem of decision fusion for cooperative spectrum sensing in cognitive radio (CR) networks is studied when fading channels are present between the CRs and the fusion center (FC). The CRs perform spectrum sensing using energy detection and transmit their binary decisions to the FC for a final decision on the absence or presence of the primary user activity. Considering the limited resources in CR networks, which makes it difficult to acquire the instantaneous channel-state information, noncoherent transmission schemes with on-off keying (OOK) and binary frequency-shift keying (BFSK) are employed to transmit the binary decisions to the FC. For each of the transmission schemes considered, energy- and decoding-based fusion rules are developed first. Then, the detection threshold at the CR nodes and at the FC, the combining weights (in the case of the energy-based fusion rule), and the sensing time are optimized to maximize the achievable secondary throughput of the CR network. Simulation results verify the theoretical analysis. It is also shown that the energy-based fusion rule outperforms the decoding-based fusion rule when the signal-to-noise ratios (SNRs) of the reporting channels are low, whereas the opposite is true for high SNRs. For the simpler energy-based fusion rule, BFSK achieves higher secondary throughput than OOK, at the expense of a larger transmission bandwidth.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
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 score0.894
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.232
Teacher spread0.222 · 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.

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

Citations10
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Vehicular TechnologySame topicCognitive Radio Networks and Spectrum SensingFrench-language works237,207