Performance degradation of source matching in optical CDMA due to source coherence effects
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this paper we study the performance of source matching technique for an optical code division multiple access (OCDMA) system in the presence of source coherence effects and square law detection process. We use a binary-asymmetric channel (BAC) model for an OCDMA system employing an all-optical passive correlator receiver. Source coherence effects lead to relative-intensity-noise (RIN) and phase-induced-intensity-noise (PIIN), which are included in our analysis. Previous studies only considered multiple access interference (MAI) noise, resulting in a Z-channel (where errors only occur for the transmission of data bit zero) model, and neglected RIN and PIIN. The presence of RIN and PIIN leads to errors occurring for both transmitted data bits one and zero, thus a BAC model. We show that source matching gain depends on the normalized source coherence time, defined as the ratio of the optical source coherence time to the bit duration. Our analysis shows that, while MAI limited analysis predicts that increasing the number of users increases the source matching gain, when taking into account RIN and PIIN, source matching gain is both bit rate and source type dependent, and tends to zero for very high numbers of users.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".