MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2141887583 · doi:10.1109/twc.2009.090263

Optimal symbol timing for OFDM wireless communications

2009· article· en· W2141887583 on OpenAlexaff
M.M. Wang, Lei Xiao, Tyler Brown, Min Dong

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Wireless Communications · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced Wireless Communication Techniques
Canadian institutionsOntario Tech University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOrthogonal frequency-division multiplexingComputer scienceChannel (broadcasting)Interference (communication)WirelessAlgorithmTransmission (telecommunications)Symbol (formal)Intersymbol interferenceDelay spreadSignal-to-noise ratio (imaging)TelecommunicationsElectronic engineeringMultipath propagationEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Orthogonal frequency division multiplexing (OFDM) has become a promising physical layer modulation technology for beyond 3G or 4G wireless communications due to effective inter-symbol interference mitigation for high speed data transmission. However, the timing of the OFDM symbol, i.e., the placement of the DFT collection window in a multi-path time dispersive channel remains an important and challenging issue in OFDM receiver design. An erroneous timing decision creates inter-symbol interference (ISI), inter-carrier interference (ICI), channel attenuation, and channel estimation error, which leads to a penalty on the collected OFDM symbol signal to noise ratio (SNR) resulting in an irreducible error floor. In this paper we quantify such effects and derive an optimal OFDM symbol timing solution in the sense of maximizing the signal to interference ratio (SIR) of the collected OFDM symbol. A practical timing algorithm, referred to as the equilibrium algorithm, is then developed to approximate the optimal timing decision. Compared with existing schemes in the literature, the proposed approach does not rely on explicit detection of individual channel paths or the delay spread boundary and therefore greatly reduces timing complexity. The equilibrium algorithm performs nearly as well as the optimal solution over a variety of channel delay spreads, is simple to implement, and is robust to channel estimation errors.

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)0.005
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.040
GPT teacher head0.305
Teacher spread0.265 · 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

Citations18
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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