MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2015740533 · doi:10.1364/oe.18.013915

Exact error rate analysis of equal gain and selection diversity for coherent free-space optical systems on strong turbulence channels

2010· article· en· W2015740533 on OpenAlexafffund
Mingbo Niu, Julian Cheng, Jonathan F. Holzman

Bibliographic record

VenueOptics Express · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicOptical Wireless Communication Technologies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British ColumbiaUniversity of British Columbia, Okanagan CampusKelowna General Hospital
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsCoding gainKeyingBit error ratePhase-shift keyingDiversity gainFree-space optical communicationDiversity schemeBinary numberPhysicsComputer scienceTelecommunicationsSelection (genetic algorithm)Optical communicationStatistical physicsMathematicsOpticsStatisticsFadingDecoding methodsArithmetic

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Exact error rate performances are studied for coherent free-space optical communication systems under strong turbulence with diversity reception. Equal gain and selection diversity are considered as practical schemes to mitigate turbulence. The exact bit-error rate for binary phase-shift keying and outage probability are developed for equal gain diversity. Analytical expressions are obtained for the bit-error rate of differential phase-shift keying and asynchronous frequency-shift keying, as well as for outage probability using selection diversity. Furthermore, we provide the closed-form expressions of diversity order and coding gain with both diversity receptions. The analytical results are verified by computer simulations and are suitable for rapid error rates calculation.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.018
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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.020

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.018
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.003
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.257
Teacher spread0.230 · 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

Citations53
Published2010
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOptics ExpressSame topicOptical Wireless Communication TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207