MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2131499054 · doi:10.1109/4234.824751

Comparison of four SNR estimators for QPSK modulations

2000· article· en· W2131499054 on OpenAlexaff
Norman C. Beaulieu, A.S. Toms, D.R. Pauluzzi

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Communications Letters · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced Wireless Communication Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoFields Institute for Research in Mathematical SciencesQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhase-shift keyingEstimatorSignal-to-noise ratio (imaging)KeyingStatisticsComputer scienceAlgorithmMathematicsBit error rateTelecommunicationsDecoding methods

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Four signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) estimators for quaternary phase-shift keying (QPSK)-like signaling are proposed and examined. Two are based on receiver statistics directly related to the SNR while two others are based on receiver statistics inversely related to the SNR. The results show that the estimators based on the inverse of the SNR perform better than the estimators based on the SNR.

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)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.039
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.042

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.039
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.064
GPT teacher head0.348
Teacher spread0.284 · 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

Citations134
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Communications LettersSame topicAdvanced Wireless Communication TechniquesFrench-language works237,207