MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2128172816 · doi:10.1109/mp.2005.1594005

Meeting mobile's demands with multicarrier systems

2005· article· en· W2128172816 on OpenAlexaff
R. Caldwell, Alagan Anpalagan

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Potentials · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicWireless Communication Networks Research
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOrthogonal frequency-division multiplexingFadingCode division multiple accessOrthogonalityElectronic engineeringComputer scienceWirelessInterference (communication)Synchronization (alternating current)Modulation (music)Time diversityDiversity schemeChannel (broadcasting)TelecommunicationsDiversity combiningComputer networkEngineeringMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

With the increasing requirements for future wireless applications, OFDM, MC-CDMA, and MC-DS-CDMA have all been considered for 4G wireless systems. These systems have the ability to incorporate very large band widths without sacrificing equalization complexity. The long symbol duration is effective at mitigating ISI, and adaptive modulation or frequency diversity can be used to provide protection against destructive fades. The benefit of MC CDMA is that it experiences frequency diversity because each bit is transmitted over several independently faded subcarriers. If some subcarriers experience destructive fades, diversity combining can be used at the receiver to recover the data. This improves the BER performance over OFDM, and this improvement is more significant as the number of subcarriers is increased. The draw back of MC-CDMA is that it may experience high levels of multiuser access interference (MAI) when the channel is heavily loaded. This occurs because each chip of the PN sequence experiences independent fading, which tends to destroy the orthogonality between spreading sequences. This increases the MAI and degrades the BER performance. Although OFDM, MC-CDMA, and MC-DS-CDMA signals experience a high PAPR, synchronization issues, and ICI, the benefits greatly outweigh these disadvantages.

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)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.044

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.004
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0130.010

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.272
Teacher spread0.256 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations15
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE PotentialsSame topicWireless Communication Networks ResearchFrench-language works237,207