MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2048283499 · doi:10.1049/iet-com.2009.0646

Incoherent spatial diversity combining scheme for spread spectrum

2011· article· en· W2048283499 on OpenAlexaff
J.E. Salt, E.R. Pelet

Bibliographic record

VenueIET Communications · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced Wireless Communication Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFadingDiversity schemeAntenna diversityComputer scienceBandwidth (computing)Diversity combiningSpread spectrumTelecommunicationsDemodulationDiversity gainDirect-sequence spread spectrumInterference (communication)Electronic engineeringAlgorithmWirelessChannel (broadcasting)Engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

There are applications in spread spectrum channels where spatial diversity is required to mitigate fading. The spreading gain in such channels is often limited to reduce the chances of a nearby interferer being in-band. With modest spreading gains the signal bandwidth may be less than the coherence bandwidth. In such cases receiver-based multi-path diversity is not feasible, and spatial diversity is used to combat fading. This study improves and extends the work presented in US patent #6389085 B1, which exploits the structure of spread spectrum signals to implement Nth order spatial diversity with simple incoherent radio frequency combining. An improved combining scheme is proposed here together with a special pseudo-random noise (PN) sequence to reduce intra symbol interference. A unique coherent all-digital demodulator is also provided. The signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) of the new system is about 3.5 dB higher than that of the original system described in the patent. The new receiver is comparable in cost to selection diversity, but does not switch antennas and therefore, does not suffer the momentary signal drop-outs. However, the penalty for eliminating the drop outs is a 1.5 dB lower output SNR.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.802
Threshold uncertainty score0.674

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.078
GPT teacher head0.274
Teacher spread0.196 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations0
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIET CommunicationsSame topicAdvanced Wireless Communication TechniquesFrench-language works237,207