MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2097191726 · doi:10.1109/ccece.2005.1556870

A cross-correlation MIMO channel model for non-isotropic scattering environment and non-omnidirectional antennas

2006· article· en· W2097191726 on OpenAlexaff
Hamidreza Saligheh Rad, Saeed Gazor

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMillimeter-Wave Propagation and Modeling
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFourier seriesIsotropyMathematical analysisFourier transformSeries expansionPhysicsMathematicsOptics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We present a cross-correlation model for multiple-input multiple-output (MIMO) Rayleigh fading channels in a two-dimensional (2D) space. In particular, we investigate the impact of non-omnidirectional antennas at both transmitter and receiver ends and the non-uniform distribution of the scatterers in the random media which introduces non-isotropic wave propagation. The non-isotropic propagation is described by general non-uniform probability density functions (pdf) for the direction-of-departure (DOD)/direction-of-arrival (DOA) of the outgoing/incoming propagating waves from/to stations. The propagation pattern of each antenna element and the effect of mutual coupling between them are also described by their Fourier series expansion. The expression of the cross-correlation function (CCF) turns out to be a linear series expansion of a number of Bessel functions of the first kind. In particular the coefficients of the expansion of the CCF are described by linear convolution of the Fourier series coefficients of the antenna pattern, the Fourier series coefficients of the azimuth angular spread and the Fourier series expansion of the pdfs describing the non-isotropic environment. In fact, the Fourier-Chebyshev series expansion of proposed CCF is given in terms of the Fourier series coefficients of the involving distributions and patterns as well as other parameters of the environment

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.664
Threshold uncertainty score0.557

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.213
Teacher spread0.199 · 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 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

Citations3
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicMillimeter-Wave Propagation and ModelingFrench-language works237,207