MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2060995746 · doi:10.1109/oceans.2007.4449138

MMSE-Lattice Sequential Equalization of Underwater Acoustic Channels

2007· article· en· W2060995746 on OpenAlexaff
Dale Green, Mohamed Oussama Damen

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicUnderwater Vehicles and Communication Systems
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsViterbi algorithmMaximum likelihood sequence estimationComputer scienceEstimatorEqualization (audio)Channel (broadcasting)Viterbi decoderAlgorithmDecoding methodsElectronic engineeringTelecommunicationsEstimation theoryEngineeringMathematicsStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Underwater acoustic communications is today accomplished with a variety of modulation techniques, including both non-coherent and coherent methods, each shown to perform "best" under certain environmental and operational constraints. Coherent communications typically involve a form of M-ary phase shift keyed (MPSK) signaling, combined with one of a variety of channel equalization schemes at the receiver. The most common scheme is the mean square error minimization (MMSE) decision feedback equalizer (DFE), designed in part by Professors John Proakis and Milica Stojanovic and now extended by many developers for a variety of applications. Even though often effective, the performance of the DFE becomes far from the optimal performance that can be obtained by the maximum likelihood sequence estimator (MLSE). While aiming for the optimal performance, our interest is in the use of small, battery- powered, DSP-based devices which have fairly hard constraints on computer resources. We consider an older alternative to the DFE, the maximum likelihood sequence estimator (MLSE), usually implemented with a Viterbi algorithm. Referring to historical coding theory, it is well known that a sequential estimation alternative to MLSE-based decoding is "almost" as effective, given a modest increase in signal-to-noise ratio (SNR). Furthermore, the computational burden is usually far less than with the conventional Viterbi approach. The focus of this paper is on the development and application of a Fano Sequential Estimator acting as an alternative to the Viterbi algorithm for MLSE-based channel compensation.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.873
Threshold uncertainty score0.293

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 science0.0000.000
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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.261
Teacher spread0.228 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations0
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicUnderwater Vehicles and Communication SystemsFrench-language works237,207