MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2112627185 · doi:10.1109/tcomm.2012.12.100185

MPPM Constellation Selection for Free-Space Optical Communications

2012· article· en· W2112627185 on OpenAlexaff
Trung Thành Nguyễn, Lutz Lampe

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Communications · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicOptical Network Technologies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHeuristicsSelection (genetic algorithm)SIGNAL (programming language)AlgorithmComputer scienceChannel (broadcasting)ConstellationFigure of meritModulation (music)Compressed sensingConstellation diagramPosition (finance)Theoretical computer scienceMathematicsMathematical optimizationArtificial intelligenceTelecommunicationsPhysicsBit error rate

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We consider the problem of designing multipulse pulse-position modulation (MPPM) constellations whose sizes are powers of two. This problem amounts to selecting a subset from the collection of all ( <sub xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">w</sub> <sup xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">n</sup> ) possible signal points of MPPM with w pulses in n time slots. In a previous work, we have tackled this selection using combinatorial heuristics. In this letter, we further explore two new continuous optimization approaches. The first one is a modified Blahut-Arimoto algorithm. The second one is inspired from compressed sensing. Using the constellation-constrained channel capacity as the figure of merit, numerical results from a relevant free-space optical communication example suggest that simple combinatorial heuristics yield practically the best designs.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
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 score0.812
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

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 studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.041
GPT teacher head0.275
Teacher spread0.234 · 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.

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

Citations7
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on CommunicationsSame topicOptical Network TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207