MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2141138878 · doi:10.1109/wcnc.2009.4917549

A TH-UWB Receiver with Near-MUD Performance for Multiple Access Interference Environments

2009· article· en· W2141138878 on OpenAlexaff
Iraj Hosseini, Norman C. Beaulieu

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicUltra-Wideband Communications Technology
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceMatched filterUltra-widebandInterference (communication)Multiuser detectionAlgorithmGaussianFilter (signal processing)Electronic engineeringGaussian noiseNoise (video)Detection theorySignal-to-noise ratio (imaging)TelecommunicationsCode division multiple accessEngineeringArtificial intelligenceDetectorPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The multiple access interference (MAI) in a time-hopping (TH) ultra-wideband (UWB) system is known to be non-Gaussian even when the system has a moderately large number of active users. Therefore, the conventional matched filter (CMF) receiver, the optimal structure for Gaussian noise which maximizes the signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) and minimizes the probability of detection error in the absence of non-Gaussian interference, is not necessarily optimal. We express and prove a stronger claim that even the outputs of the matched filters in the conventional UWB receiver can not provide a sufficient decision statistic for detecting the information bits transmitted by the desired user. Further, a novel TH-UWB receiver is introduced which uses a similar methodology to the optimal multiuser detection (MUD) algorithm for detecting the information bits. However, the complexity of this new receiver is much less than that of the optimal MUD algorithm. It employs only one matched filter instead of a bank of matched filters resulting in a simple and low-cost TH-UWB receiver. Simulation results show that the new receiver outperforms previous single-user TH-UWB receivers and achieves essentially the performance of the CMF receiver operating in a single-user system.

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: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.779
Threshold uncertainty score0.361

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 science0.0010.000
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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.225
Teacher spread0.209 · 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 designOther design
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 topicUltra-Wideband Communications TechnologyFrench-language works237,207