MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2112075308 · doi:10.1109/glocom.2008.ecp.637

ISI-Free Cochannel Interference Whitening for Bandlimited Fading Channels

2008· article· en· W2112075308 on OpenAlexaff
Amir Masoud Rabiei, Norman C. Beaulieu

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicWireless Communication Networks Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIntersymbol interferenceInterference (communication)Raised-cosine filterNyquist ISI criterionSignal-to-interference-plus-noise ratioBandlimitingTransmitterMatched filterFilter (signal processing)Computer scienceEqualization (audio)Adjacent-channel interferenceNoise (video)Root-raised-cosine filterElectronic engineeringSignal-to-noise ratio (imaging)FadingTelecommunicationsControl theory (sociology)Bandwidth (computing)MathematicsLow-pass filterEngineeringPhysicsPower (physics)Channel (broadcasting)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The problem of cochannel interference mitigation using interference-plus-noise whitening receiver design in the presence of intersymbol interference (ISI) is considered. The effect of ISI on the signal-to-interference-plus-noise ratio (SINR) of the interference whitening receiver is examined. Then, two methods are proposed to maximize the SINR without introducing ISI. In the first method, the transmitter and receiver filters are designed to maximize the SINR while their overall spectrum maintains a given Nyquist spectrum to avoid ISI. In the second method, the transmitter filter is assumed to be fixed and only the receiver filter is designed to achieve maximum SINR without introducing ISI. The SINR of the ISI-free SINR-maximizing filter is then analytically compared with that of the conventional matched filter receiver and the interference whitening receiver. Numerical results are presented for the cases when standard raised-cosine and Beaulieu-Tan-Damen pulses are used in the system.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.939
Threshold uncertainty score0.735

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0040.002
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 head0.090
GPT teacher head0.299
Teacher spread0.210 · 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
GenreMethods

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

Citations2
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicWireless Communication Networks ResearchFrench-language works237,207