MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2122044705 · doi:10.1049/el:20092136

Comparison of amplitude-optimised bit-edge equalisation with pulse-width modulation in high-speed wireline application

2009· article· en· W2122044705 on OpenAlexaff
Lecheng Zhang, T. Kwaśniewski

Bibliographic record

VenueElectronics Letters · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvancements in PLL and VCO Technologies
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIntersymbol interferencePulse-amplitude modulationBackplaneWirelineElectronic engineeringTransmitterPulse-width modulationAmplitudeAmplitude modulationPulse shapingComputer scienceModulation (music)Bit error ratePulse (music)EngineeringTelecommunicationsBandwidth (computing)Electrical engineeringFrequency modulationPhysicsOpticsChannel (broadcasting)AcousticsDetectorWirelessVoltage

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

An amplitude-optimised bit-edge equalisation (BEE) scheme is presented and compared with pulse-width modulation for mitigating intersymbol interference in high-speed backplane applications. With transmitter pre-coding and pre-emphasis, this BEE uses an adaptive LMS algorithm as a receiver error convergence engine by adjusting error derivation points. The optimality of the proposed BEE scheme is discussed.

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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.357
Threshold uncertainty score0.582

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.265
Teacher spread0.252 · 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
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

Citations1
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueElectronics LettersSame topicAdvancements in PLL and VCO TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207