Analysis of area under the ROC curve of energy detection
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A simple figure of merit to describe the performance of an energy detector is desirable. The area under the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve, denoted (AUC), is such a measure, which varies between 1/2 and 1. If the detector's performance is no better than flipping a coin, then the AUC is 1/2 , and it increases to one as the detector performance improves. However, in the wireless literature, the AUC measure has gone unnoticed. In this paper, to address this gap, we comprehensively analyze the AUC of an energy detector with no-diversity reception and with several popular diversity schemes. The channel model is assumed to be Nakagami-m fading. First, the average AUC is derived for the case of no-diversity reception. Second, the average AUC is derived for diversity reception cases including maximal ratio combining (MRC), square-law combining (SLC) and selection combining (SC). Further, for Rayleigh fading channels, the impacts of channel estimation errors and fading correlations are analyzed. High SNR (signal-to-noise ratio) approximations and the detection diversity gain are also derived. The analytical results are verified by numerical computations and by Monte-Carlo simulations.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.019 | 0.104 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".