MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2081186775 · doi:10.1109/tvt.2014.2298395

Performance of $p$-Norm Detector in AWGN, Fading, and Diversity Reception

2014· article· en· W2081186775 on OpenAlexafffund
Vesh Raj Sharma Banjade, Chintha Tellambura, Hai Jiang

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Vehicular Technology · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicCognitive Radio Networks and Spectrum Sensing
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsAlgorithmAdditive white Gaussian noiseNorm (philosophy)FadingMathematicsDiscrete mathematicsApplied mathematicsStatisticsWhite noiseDecoding methods

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Performance analysis of the p-norm detector to date has been limited to ad hoc approximations, nonfading channels, and Rayleigh fading. To overcome these limitations, we develop several analytical/numerical solutions for detection probability Pdand false alarm probability Pf, which are necessary to specify the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves of the p-norm detector. First, for nonfading channels (additive white Gaussian noise (AWGN) only), the moment-generating function (mgf) of the decision variable is derived in two forms: 1) closed form for even integer p and 2) series form for arbitrary p. To evaluate Pdand Pf, a numerical method utilizing the Talbot inversion is developed for case 1, and an infinite series expansion with convergence acceleration based on the e-algorithm is derived for case 2. As an alternative to mgf-based analysis, a Laguerre polynomial series is also used to derive new Pdand Pfapproximations. Second, series-form mgf-based Pdexpressions are derived for κ-μ and α-μ fading channels. Third, for antenna diversity reception, new p-law combining (pLC) and p-law selection (pLS) schemes are proposed. The performance of these combiners with the p-norm detector is derived for Nakagami-m fading and is compared with that of the classical maximal ratio combining (MRC) and selection combining (SC). Interestingly, both pLC and pLS perform similarly to SC at low signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) but outperform it at relatively high SNR, with pLC performing closer to the optimal MRC. Numerical results are presented to verify the derived results and to provide further insights.

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)0.012
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 score0.021

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.012
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.197
Teacher spread0.190 · 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

Citations21
Published2014
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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