MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Lower Bounds to the Performance of Bit Synchronization for Bandwidth Efficient Pulse-Shaping

2010· article· en· W2142813958 on OpenAlexaff
Amin Emad, Norman C. Beaulieu

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Communications · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced Wireless Communication Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSynchronizerUpper and lower boundsIntersymbol interferenceAlgorithmSynchronization (alternating current)Pulse-amplitude modulationBandwidth (computing)MathematicsComputer scienceCramér–Rao boundDecoding methodsPulse (music)Control theory (sociology)Topology (electrical circuits)TelecommunicationsDetectorCombinatorics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Bandwidth efficient signaling requires using pulse-shaping that inherently has intersymbol interference (ISI) except when the timing is perfect. Several lower bounds to the mean-square-error (MSE) of non-data-aided bit-synchronizers are derived for this case. The optimal lower bound is derived using the maximum likelihood (ML) criterion for a sequence of binary pulse amplitude modulated pulses in the presence of ISI and Gaussian noise. This lower bound is used as a benchmark to evaluate the performance of other synchronizers in a practical scenario. It is shown that a previous lower bound based on the ISI-free ML synchronizer cannot be used to lower bound the MSE of bit-synchronizers. A detection theory bound (DTB) (also called Ziv-Zakai bound) is applied to the symbol timing recovery problem in the presence of ISI and it is shown that this bound is a tight lower bound on the MSE of the ML synchronizer. A simple lower bound on this DTB is derived and it is shown that the simple bound is almost as tight as the well known modified Cramer-Rao bound (MCRB) at moderate values of SNR, while it does not suffer from the shortcomings of the MCRB at small values of 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)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.044
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 score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.037

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.044
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0030.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.002

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.270
Teacher spread0.250 · 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

Citations3
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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