Accurate Performance Evaluation of Time-Hopping and Direct-Sequence UWB Systems in Multi-User Interference
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
An exact analysis is derived for precisely calculating the bit error probability of time-hopping and direct-sequence ultra-wideband systems with multi-user interference in an additive white Gaussian noise environment. The analytical expressions are validated by simulation and used to assess the accuracy of the Gaussian approximation proposed for estimating the performance of ultra-wideband communication systems. The Gaussian approximation is shown to be inaccurate for predicting the bit error rate for medium and large signal-to-noise ratio values. The performances of time-hopping and direct-sequence modulation schemes are accurately compared for different numbers of users and frame widths. It is shown that direct-sequence binary phase-shift keying outperforms time-hopping binary phase-shift keying for medium and large values of signal-to-noise ratio, which contradicts some previous results obtained using a Gaussian approximation.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it