MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Exact error probability analysis of rectangular QAM for single- and multichannel reception in nakagami-m fading channels

2009· article· en· W2107428208 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Communications · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced Wireless Communication Techniques
Canadian institutionsInstitut National de la Recherche ScientifiqueUniversité du Québec à Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNakagami distributionFadingQuadrature amplitude modulationHypergeometric functionQAMMathematicsIndependent and identically distributed random variablesAlgorithmStatisticsTopology (electrical circuits)Random variableCombinatoricsBit error rateMathematical analysis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this contribution, we derive exact closed-form expressions for the average symbol error probability (SEP) of arbitrary rectangular quadrature amplitude modulation (QAM) for single- and multichannel diversity reception over independent but not-necessarily identically distributed Nakagami-m fading channels. The diversity branches may hence exhibit identical or distinctive power levels and their associated Nakagami indexes need not be the same. Our work extends previous results pertaining to nondiversity reception of M-ary rectangular QAM over Rayleigh fading channels and multichannel reception of M-ary square QAM over Nakagami-m fading channels. For a given number L of diversity branches and a corresponding set of arbitrary real-valued Nakagami indexes not less than 1/2, our SEP results are expressed in terms of Gauss's hypergeometric function <sub xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">2</sub> F <sub xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">1</sub> and Lauricella's multivariate hypergeometric function F <sub xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">D</sub> <sup xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">(L)</sup> of L variables, both of which can be efficiently evaluated using standard numerical softwares.

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 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 score0.859
Threshold uncertainty score0.812

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
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 head0.055
GPT teacher head0.306
Teacher spread0.250 · 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