MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2121310563 · doi:10.1109/tvt.2008.919616

Comparison of Frequency Offset and Timing Offset Effects on the Performance of SC-FDE and OFDM Over UWB Channels

2009· article· en· W2121310563 on OpenAlexaff
Yue Wang, Xiaodai Dong

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Vehicular Technology · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced Wireless Communication Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Victoria
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCarrier frequency offsetOrthogonal frequency-division multiplexingJitterFrequency offsetSC-FDEOffset (computer science)Bit error rateElectronic engineeringComputer scienceIntersymbol interferenceTelecommunicationsEngineeringDecoding methodsChannel (broadcasting)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, the effects of carrier frequency offset (CFO) and sampling time offset (STO) on the performance of single-carrier block transmission with frequency-domain equalization (SC-FDE) and orthogonal frequency-division multiplexing (OFDM) over ultrawideband (UWB) channels are investigated. The signal-to-interference-plus-noise ratio (SINR) of SC-FDE in the presence of CFO is derived and compared with that of OFDM. The effects of CFO on the bit error rate (BER) performance of both systems are also simulated and compared. Two forms of STO are considered, i.e., a constant timing shift from its optimum sampling timing instant and a random timing jitter. We show through analysis that although SC-FDE is reasonably robust to a constant timing offset, it is fairly sensitive to random timing jitter. The BER performances of SC-FDE in the presence of a constant STO and random timing jitter are simulated and compared with OFDM.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.263
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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations44
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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