MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2113552374 · doi:10.1109/26.843130

Valuation of the effects of intersymbol interference in decision-feedback equalizers

2000· article· en· W2113552374 on OpenAlexaff
T.J. Willink, P.H. Wittke, L. L. Campbell

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Communications · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced Wireless Communication Techniques
Canadian institutionsQueen's UniversityCommunications Research Centre Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIntersymbol interferenceComputer scienceInterference (communication)Markov processBounding overwatchChannel (broadcasting)Convergence (economics)Control theory (sociology)Equalization (audio)Noise (video)AlgorithmMathematicsTelecommunicationsStatisticsArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

For channels which suffer predominantly from additive noise and intersymbol interference, the decision-feedback equalizer has provided a relatively simple solution for reducing the effects of interfering symbols at the input to the decision device. A technique is developed that enables fast, accurate calculation of the error performance of decision-feedback equalization for a number of channel models. The method is to calculate the n-step transition probability for an associated Markov process and then use this transition probability as an approximation to the stationary probability distribution. For systems with finite memory, it is proved that the method converges. If the signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) is high and the signal amplitude is more than twice the worst-case interference, it is shown that the convergence is rapid. Numerical results indicate that the convergence is rapid enough to make this an efficient method of calculation, even for channels for which the interference does not fully satisfy this condition. Two examples are given here, but the technique has been tested on most of the examples that have been presented in the literature. The method yields results in closer agreement with simulation results than previous results obtained using bounding techniques, especially at low to moderate SNRs, and requires less computation.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.867
Threshold uncertainty score0.445

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 communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.286
Teacher spread0.261 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations9
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on CommunicationsSame topicAdvanced Wireless Communication TechniquesFrench-language works237,207