MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2136335103 · doi:10.1109/tcomm.2010.04.090075

An analytical approach for performance evaluation of BICM transmission over Nakagami-m fading channels

2010· article· en· W2136335103 on OpenAlexaff
Alireza Kenarsari-Anhari, Lutz Lampe

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Communications · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced Wireless Communication Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFadingNakagami distributionAlgorithmPhase-shift keyingAdditive white Gaussian noiseMultipath propagationComputer scienceBit error rateElectronic engineeringMathematicsTelecommunicationsDecoding methodsWhite noiseChannel (broadcasting)Engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Bit-interleaved coded modulation (BICM) has established itself as a quasi-standard for bandwidth- and power-efficient wireless communication. In this paper, we present an analytical approach to evaluate the performance of BICM transmission over frequency-flat fading additive white Gaussian noise channels. The statistic of the fading envelope is modeled as Nakagami-m distributed, which spans a wide range of practical multipath fading scenarios through adjustment of the m-parameter. For this setup, we derive approximations for the bit-error rate (BER) and cutoff rate of BICM. Different from previously proposed methods, our analysis is valid for general quadrature amplitude modulation and phase shift keying signal constellations and arbitrary bit-to-symbol mapping rules, and it results in simple closed-form expressions. The key idea is to use well-chosen subsets of signal points to approximate the probability density function of reliability metrics used for decoding. This approximation is accurate for signal-to-noise ratio regions of interest for BICM systems with moderate coding complexity such as, e.g., convolutional coded BICM systems. Based on this approximation we also derive an asymptotic BER expression, which reveals the diversity order and coding gain of BICM. The usefulness of the proposed analytical approach is validated through numerical and simulation results for a number of BICM transmission examples.

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)0.011
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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.011
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.062
GPT teacher head0.344
Teacher spread0.282 · 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
GenreMethods

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

Citations30
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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