MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2149405857 · doi:10.1109/jlt.2009.2015584

Moment-Generating Function Method Used to Evaluate the Performance of a Linear Optical Communication System

2009· article· en· W2149405857 on OpenAlexaff
Liang Chen, Zhongxi Zhang, Xiaoyi Bao

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Lightwave Technology · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicOptical Network Technologies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPolarization mode dispersionBit error rateAmplified spontaneous emissionMoment-generating functionOptical communicationPhase-shift keyingPolarization (electrochemistry)Electronic engineeringRandom variableOpticsAlgorithmMoment (physics)KeyingMathematicsPhysicsTelecommunicationsComputer scienceDispersion (optics)StatisticsEngineeringQuantum mechanicsDecoding methods

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The moment-generating function (MGF) of the received photoelectric current is evaluated for a linear optical communication system consisting of distributed amplified spontaneous emission (ASE), polarization-mode dispersion (PMD), and polarization dependent loss (PDL). Using this function, optical performance characterization based on the bit error rate (BER), Q-factor, and signal-to-noise ratio (SNR), can be evaluated. As an example of the applicability to binary differential phase-shift keying (DPSK) systems with defined PDL, the BER results predicted by linked model and lumped model are compared. Our results indicate that the difference can be orders of magnitude when the PDL is larger than 2.5 dB. Additionally, random PDL induced statistical feature of the BER is entirely different for these two models. Finally, relations between the statistical variations of other performance parameters ( Q-factor and SNR) and link model parameters (input signal polarization, average PDL value, and link number <i xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">K</i> ) are also investigated.

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)0.001
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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.379
Threshold uncertainty score0.381

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.275
Teacher spread0.256 · 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 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

Citations1
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Lightwave TechnologySame topicOptical Network TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207